Allahabad High Court
Mehandi Hasan And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 18 December, 2019
Author: Ali Zamin
Bench: Ali Zamin
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 86 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 46669 of 2019 Applicant :- Mehandi Hasan And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Case No. 1824 of 2019 (State of U.P. Vs. Mehandi Hasan & others) arising out of Case Crime No.445 of 2019, under Sections 323,504 and 308 I.P.C., Police Station Baradari, District Bareilly pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Ist, Bareilly.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that Mehandi Hasan is Mutwalli of a Waqf Imambara and due to dispute of the property of the Waqf Imambara, Mehandi Hasan and his three sons have been falsely implicated in this case. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. At last he submitted that the applicants are ready to appear before the court and to face the trial. He sought some time to surrender before the court below.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed and submitted that fracture in the head injury of Tasleem has been found. Initially NCR under Sections 323 and 504 I.P.C. was registered and on account of injury of Tasleem, the case was converted under Section 308 I.P.C.
From the perusal of the 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. All the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of power conferred 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 in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, 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. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any ground to quash the entire proceedings of aforementioned case, therefore, the prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused.
However, in the interest of justice, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, then the bail application of the applicants be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. For a period of 30 days from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 18.12.2019 MAA/-