Allahabad High Court
Narendra Singh And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 6 May, 2025
Author: Deepak Verma
Bench: Deepak Verma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:72481 Court No. - 84 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26256 of 2024 Applicant :- Narendra Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Akansha Verma,Deepak Kumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ravi Sahu Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants; learned counsel for the informant; learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the impugned order dated 10.06.2024 passed on discharge application under section 239 Cr.P.C. in Criminal Case No. 12607 of 2022 (State Vs. Dependra Chauhan and others) in charge sheet dated 3.5.2023, case crime no. 35 of 2022, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 354, 448, 511, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Shivrajpur, District Kanpur (Outer), passed by learned Civil Judge (S.D) Court No.2/A.C.J.M. Kanpur Dehat.
3. Instant F.I.R. has been lodged through application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. alleging that accused persons molested and assaulted the informant as a result she received injuries. The applicants earlier challenged the summoning order by filing Application under Section 482 No.27423 of 2023 and the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 31.07.2023 disposed of the said application directing that if the applicants move discharge application through counsel within three weeks, their discharge application shall be decided within a period of two months. The trial court considered the discharge application and rejected the same vide order dated 10.06.2024. The said order is arbitrary, illegal and has been passed without considering the material available on record and the same is liable to be set aside.
4. Per contra, Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the applicants and submitted that order passed by the trial court is just and proper. The trial court after perusing the entire facts, has rightly rejected the discharge application of the applicants.
5. Considered the argument raised by counsel for the applicants and perused the record. While deciding the discharge application, the trial court has to consider the evidence available on record and if the court finds that prima facie offence is made out and evidence are supporting the prosecution story, the court would not go into the merit of the case. The counsel has filed discharge application on the ground of alibi which is not part of the case diary that applicant was not present at the place of incident when incident took place. The plea of alibi cannot be considered and examined while deciding discharge application. The plea of alibi is defence of the applicant which would require proper examination at the trial. While considering the discharge application, the court has to see whether there is sufficient evidence to proceed with the trial or not. The defence of the accused cannot be looked into at the stage of considering the discharge application. On perusal of order dated 10.06.2024, it is apparent that the trial court after examining the evidence available on record, rightly rejected the discharge application.
6. In view of the above, in the light of judgment of the Apex Court in the matters of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, Manik B. Vs. Kadapala Sreyes Reddy & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 642, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, 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,, no ground for quashing the aforesaid impugned order is made out which may call for any interference by this Court in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
7. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 6.5.2025 Meenu Singh