Allahabad High Court
Aditya Singh Chauhan vs State Of U.P. And Another on 6 January, 2023
Author: Samit Gopal
Bench: Samit Gopal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 69 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 35083 of 2022 Applicant :- Aditya Singh Chauhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Saurabh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heared Sri Saurabh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Raj Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the State.
The present application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant- Aditya Singh Chauhan with the following prayer:-
"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow this application quash the charge-sheet dated 25.07.2020 and cognizance order dated 17.08.2020 passed by A.C.J.M., Chhibramau in Case No. 1159 of 2020, Case Crime No. 0589/2019, under Sections 406, 420 I.P.C., Police Station- Kotwali Chibramau, District Kannauj (State vs. Nanhu @ Nanhe Singh and others) with a further prayer to stay the proceedings of the aforesaid case.
It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to stay the entire proceeding which is pending in the court of A.C.J.M. Chhibramau in Case No. 1159 of 2020, Case Crime No. 0589/2019, under Sections 406, 420 I.P.C., Police Station- Kotwali Chibramau, District Kannauj (State vs. Nanhu @ Nanhe Singh and others) during the pendency of this Application or may pass such other or further order which the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice."
At the very outset, learned counsel for the State states that this is second petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by the applicant for the same prayers. He has produced before the Court an order dated 11.08.2021 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Application U/S 482 No. 11736 of 2021 (Aditya Singh Chauhan vs. State of U.P. and another) and has argued that the said petition was filed for quashing of the charge-sheet dated 25.07.2020 and the cognizance-cum-summoning order dated 17.08.2020 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 1159 of 2020, under Sections 420, 406 I.P.C., Police Station- Kotwali Chibramau, District Kannauj arising out of Case Crime No. 0589/2019 pending in the Court of Aditional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chibramau, Kannauj.
It is argued that this is second petition for the same reliefs by the same applicant but in paragraph 3 of the affidavit it has been mentioned that this is the first criminal misc. application being filed on behalf of the applicant before this Hon'ble Court against the charge-sheet dated 25.07.2020 and no other application against the same cause of action is pending. It is further argued that the same is a false averment pleaded by the applicant who is the deponent in the present petition and further the said paragraph has been sworn on the personal knowledge of the applicant. The applicant has committed fraud before this Court.
On being countered learned counsel for the applicant states that he has no knowledge of the applicant filing a previous 482 petition before this Court and the order passed therein. He states that the matter be dismissed as withdrawn.
After having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is apparent that the present application U/S 482 has been filed with the prayers as quoted above. Paragraph 3 of the affidavit stating the present application to be the first application against charge-sheet and no other application for the same cause of action is pending is quoted herein below:
"3. That this is the first Criminal Misc. Application is being filed on behalf of the applicants before this Hon'ble Court against the Charge Sheet dated 25.07.2020. No other application against the same cause of action is pending."
The order dated 11.08.2021 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Application 482 No. 11736 of 2021 (Aditya Singh Chauhan vs. State of U.P. and another) being a previous application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. being filed by the applicant with the same prayer is extracted herein below:-
"Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
The instant application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 25.7.2020 and cognizance-cum-summoning order dated 17.8.2020 passed on the same day as well as entire proceedings of Case No.1159 of 2020 under Sections 420, 406 IPC P.S.Chhibramau District Kannauj arising out of Case Crime No.589 of 2019 pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrte, Chhibramau, Kannauj.
The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant are disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment.
Per contra, the learned AGA has contended that from the allegations made in the FIR prima facie offence is made out against the applicant. The innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at the pre trial stage. Therefore, the applicant does not deserve any indulgence.
From the perusal of the materials on record and looking into the facts of the case and after considering the arguments made at the bar, it does not appear that no offence has been made out against the applicant.
At the stage of issuing process the court below is not expected to examine and assess in detail the material placed on record, only this has to be seen whether prima facie cognizable offence is disclosed or not. The Apex Court has also laid down the guidelines where the criminal proceedings could be interfered and quashed in exercise of its power by the High Court in the following cases:-(i) R.P. Kapoor Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 S.C. 866, (ii) State of Haryana Vs. Bhajanlal, 1992 SCC (Crl.)426, (iii) State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Crl.)192 and (iv) Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283.
From the aforesaid decisions the Apex Court has settled the legal position for quashing of the proceedings at the initial stage. The test to be applied by the court is to whether uncontroverted allegation as made prima facie establishes the offence and the chances of ultimate conviction is bleak and no useful purpose is likely to be served by allowing criminal proceedings to be continue. In S.W. Palankattkar & others Vs. State of Bihar, 2002 (44) ACC 168, it has been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that quashing of the criminal proceedings is an exception than a rule. The inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C itself envisages three circumstances under which the inherent jurisdiction may be exercised:-(i) to give effect an order under the Code, (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of the court ; (iii) to otherwise secure the ends of justice. The power of High Court is very wide but should be exercised very cautiously to do real and substantial justice for which the court alone exists.
The High Court would not embark upon an inquiry as it is the function of the Trial Judge/Court. The interference at the threshold of quashing of the criminal proceedings in case in hand cannot be said to be exceptional as it discloses prima facie commission of an offence. In the result, the prayer for quashing of the impugned charge sheet, cognizance-cum-summoning order and the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case is refused. There is no merit in this application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The applicant has ample opportunity to raise all the objections at the appropriate stage.
However, the applicant is directed to appear and surrender before the court below and apply for bail within a period of thirty days from today, the prayer for bail shall be considered expeditiously in accordance with law after hearing the Public Prosecutor.
In case the applicant fails to surrender within the stipulated period, the court below shall proceed in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid observations, this application is finally disposed of.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad or certified copy issued from the Registry of the High Court, Allahabad.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing."
The perusal of the said order goes to show that the said Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. was filed for quashing of the charge-sheet dated 25.07.2020, cognizance and summoning order dated 17.08.2020 and the entire proceedings of the case against the applicant for which the present application has been filed. The said application was disposed of vide the said order by directing the applicant to appear and surrender before the court below and apply for bail within a period of thirty days from the date of the said order and the bail application was directed to be considered expeditiously in accordance with law.
There is nothing on record to show that the said order has been complied with by the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant is unable to even state as to whether the same has been complied with or not. This Court thus holds that the present application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. is a second application for the same reliefs as the previous application which stood disposed of vide order dated 11.08.2021. There is material concealment of relevant fact of filing previous application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. for the same reliefs by the applicant. The deponent in the present 482 application is the applicant himself.
In these circumstances, it is held that the present application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by concealing a relevant and material fact and the applicant has committed fraud upon this Court.
This Court thus imposes a case of Rs. 50,000/- upon the applicant / deponent of the present application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. The same is directed to be deposited within two weeks from today by the applicant / deponent of the present application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. before the Registrar General of this Court who shall transmit the same to the High Court Legal Services Committee for its utilization therein.
If the said amount is not deposited as stated within the said time, the Registrar General shall issue a letter to the District Magistrate / Collector, Kannauj directing him to issue a recovery citation against the applicant / deponent for recovery of the said amount as land revenue. The District Magistrate / Collector, Kannauj is directed to recover the said amount expeditiously and after recovery of the same, he shall forthwith transmit the same to the Registrar General of this Court which shall be utilized as stated above.
The present petition thus stands dismissed with cost and the aforesaid direction.
A copy of this order be communicated to the trial court within a period of two weeks by the Registrar General of this Court.
Order Date :- 6.1.2023 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.)