Allahabad High Court
Smt. Shakuntala Gupta @ Sandhya And 2 ... vs State Of U.P. And Another on 27 June, 2022
Author: Ajit Singh
Bench: Ajit Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 5 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 15828 of 2022 Applicant :- Smt. Shakuntala Gupta @ Sandhya And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Kirit Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.
The applicant through this application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Case no. 128 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 233 of 2021, under sections 323, 504, 506 and 452 I.P.C., P.S. Nizamabad, district-Azamgarh, pending in the court of A.C.J.M., court no. 10, Azamgarh, as well as charesheet dated 14.12.2021.
The contention of the counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has submitted that 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 applicant.
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 applicant. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions 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 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. Moreover, the applicant has got right of discharge under Sections 239 or 227/228 and 245 Cr.P.C. as the case may be through a proper application a proper application for the said purpose raising all the grounds/grievances which have been taken in this application or which may have been taken. for the said purpose and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.
After having very carefully examined, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the material brought on record, this Court find that there is no justification for quashing the prosecution of the aforementioned case.
The application lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.
However, it is directed that if the applicant applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in view of the settled law laid by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 5191 of 2021.
Order Date :- 27.6.2022 Faridul