Allahabad High Court
Pawan Kumar Sindhu vs State Of U.P. And Another on 21 May, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:86513 Court No. - 87 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 17215 of 2017 Applicant :- Pawan Kumar Sindhu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Pandey,Sandeep Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- Dinesh Kumar Yadav,G.A.,Shyam Murari Upadhyay Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.
1. Heard Sri Atul Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Dinesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, Sri R.P. Chaudhari, learned A.G.A. for the State-O.P. no.1 and perused the record.
2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants praying for quashing the entire proceedings of Case Crime No. 270 of 2014, under Section 219 I.P.C., Police Station Jansath, District Muzaffarnagar, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarnagar, as Case No. 10502 of 2016 (State vs. Pawan and others).
3. The applicant herein happens to be the Consolidation Officer, Jansath, District Muzaffarnagar and the allegations levelled against him that he has made entry of three different fields in one plot and further asked bribe of Rs.25,000/-. In the matter, the F.I.R. was registered on the basis of an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., in which after investigation charge sheet was submitted and cognizance has been taken against the applicant vide order dated 26.10.2016 which has been assailed by means of the instant application.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and there is no evidence on record to show that the applicant was asking bribe. However, nothing in the application to show that the applicant has fraudulently mixed three fields and make a new Gata. He submitted that the applicant has never committed any offence as alleged against him. Further submission is that in the instant matter dispute between the parties is purely civil in nature, which has been given criminal colour by O.P. no.2, which is pure abuse of process of law and the same is liable to the set aside.
5. Per contra, Sri Dinesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 submits that the complaint is completed corroborated with the statement of opposite party no. 2 recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and after the investigation the charge sheet has been filed. He further submitted that no illegality in the impugned summoning order.
6. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the application and contended that during the course of investigation there was enough evidence against the applicant and after looking the evidence the charge sheet has been filed. It is further submitted that the Court below has rightly summoned the applicant and no interference is required by this Court in the impugned order as well as the on going proceedings.
7. From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. The arguments raised by learned counsel for the applicants are all disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court.
8. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matters of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918, R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192, and lastly, Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 has held that only those cases in which no prima facie case is made out can be considered in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
9. The instant application does not fall under the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgments mentioned above, and followed in a number of matters. Moreover, the facts as alleged cannot be said that, prima facie, no offence is made out against the applicants. It is only after the evidence and trial, it can be seen as to whether the offence, as alleged, has been committed or not.
10. However, it is open for the applicants to take all its defence in the trial.
11. Hence, the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be entertained and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 21.5.2025 Manoj