Allahabad High Court
Syed Yaseer Ibrahim vs State Of U.P. And Another on 10 August, 2021
Author: Rajiv Gupta
Bench: Rajiv Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 80 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9704 of 2021 Applicant :- Syed Yaseer Ibrahim Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Praveen Kumar Singh,Gaurav Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge-sheet dated 12.02.2021, cognizance order dated 08.03.2021 and entire proceedings of Case Crime No. 15 of 2020, under Section 420 IPC, Police Station Swaroop Nagar, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the court of Metropolitan Magistrate-Ist, Kanpur Nagar.
As per the allegations made in the FIR, it is alleged that a suit was filed being Suit No. 1745 of 2008 (Azim Wasif Vs. Syed Yaseer Ibrahim). In the said suit, an interim order dated 19.09.2009 was granted, by which, it was directed to maintain status-quo. Subsequently, this suit was dismissed in default on 13.10.2014, however within a week, an application for restoration of the suit was filed by Azim Wasif and the suit was restored on 21.04.2016, however, during this period, the applicant had transferred the property on 02.01.2015.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the FIR and the material collected during the course of investigation, no offence is disclosed against the applicant and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He has pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.
Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the FIR and the material collected during the course of investigation, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicant and as such, impugned charge-sheet, cognizance order and entire proceedings cannot be quashed.
Moreover, all the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 CrPC. At this stage, only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
The prayer for quashing the impugned charge-sheet, cognizance order and entire proceedings is therefore refused.
However, it is directed that if the applicant appears before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of settled law laid down 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 in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC).
For a period of 30 days from today or till the applicant appears and applies for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against him. 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 observations, this application under Section 482 CrPC is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 10.8.2021 Nadim