Allahabad High Court
Lalita And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 24 July, 2023
Author: Rajiv Gupta
Bench: Rajiv Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:146817 Court No. - 86 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26307 of 2023 Applicant :- Lalita And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mata Pher Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing cognizance/summoning order dated 06.02.2018 as well as entire criminal proceedings of Case No. 924 of 2022 (Old No. 416 of 2017) (State Vs. Harish Sahgal and another), arising out of Case Crime No. 355 of 2016, under Sections 406, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Nanauta, District Saharanpur, pending in the court of Additional Civil Judge (J.D.)/J.M., Deoband, District Saharanpur.
3. 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 applicants and the present case has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of harassment. He has pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention, as such, impugned cognizance/summoning order as well as entire proceedings be quashed.
4. 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 applicants and as such, impugned cognizance/summoning order as well as entire proceedings cannot be quashed.
5. 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 relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
6. At this stage, only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the 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.
7. Moreover, the applicants had already been directed to be released on bail and they have got right of discharge under Section 239, 245 or 227 Cr.P.C., as the case may be, through a proper application for the said purpose and they are free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the trial court.
8. At this stage, this Court is not in a position to weigh the factual matrix of the case properly and accused persons have a right to file a discharge application before the trial court and the trial court may decide their discharge application, if there is no evidence against them.
9. The prayer for quashing the impugned cognizance/summoning order as well as entire proceedings is therefore refused.
10. However, it is directed that in case the applicants file an application for discharge before the court below, the same be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law after hearing both the parties.
11. With the aforesaid directions, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 24.7.2023 Subham