Allahabad High Court
Sunil Yadav vs State Of U.P. And Another on 13 December, 2019
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 81 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 46121 of 2019 Applicant :- Sunil Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajit Narain Mishra,Sunil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Ajit Narain Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri G. P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 24.07.2019, arising out of Criminal Case No. 1746 of 2019, in Case Crime No. 374 of 2018 (State vs. Sunil Yadav & Others), under Section 323, 354B of I.P.C., Police Station Bansgaon, District Gorakhpur.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the wife of the applicant Neetu Yadav had earlier lodged an N.C.R. against the husband of the opposite party no. 2 being NCR No. 89 of 2018 on 03.06.2018, under Sections 323, 504, 352, 427 I.P.C. and thereafter by way of counter blast the opposite party no. 2 has lodged the present F.I.R., therefore, the charge sheet needs to be quashed.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing.
I have gone through the F.I.R. It is recorded in it that on 17.06.2018 at about 09:00 PM, when the opposite party no. 2 had gone to attend the call of nature, the applicant is said to have molested her. The police after investigation and after having recorded the statements of as many as twelve witnesses has submitted the charge sheet against the accused applicant. The statements of these witnesses recorded in investigation cannot be disbelieved in proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as the same would require trial.
The arguments which are made by the learned counsel for the applicant are related to factual aspect which cannot be seen at this stage in the proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of this case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the Bar relates to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases of R. P. Kapur vs. The State Of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, AIR 1992 SC 604, State of Bihar and Anr. Vs. P.P. Sharma, AIR 1991 SC 1260 lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Md. Sharaful Haque and Ors., AIR 2005 SC 9. The disputed defense of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings is refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail may 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 judgement 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 applicant. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 13.12.2019 VPS