Allahabad High Court
Sunil Kumar Pathak And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 11 September, 2019
Author: Rajiv Gupta
Bench: Rajiv Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 23811 of 2019 Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Pathak And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vijai Kumar Tripathi,Chandra Kumar Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 21.02.2019 as well as entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.143 of 2017 (Ram Awadh Dhobi Vs. Sunil Kumar Pathak and others), under Sections 323, 452, 406, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(1)(da) and 3(1)(dha) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Uruwa Bazar, District Gorakhpur, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Gorakhpur.
As per the allegations made in the complaint, it is alleged that on 22.06.2015, an amount of Rs.40,000/- was paid as advance by the Opposite Party No.2 to the applicants in lieu of sale of a piece of land. On payment of the entire amount, it was agreed that the sale-deed will be executed in favour of the Opposite Party No.2.
However, subsequently after making arrangement of the balance amount of money, the Opposite Party No.2 insisted upon the applicants to get the sale-deed executed. However, the applicants started dilly dallying and refused to return back the money paid by the Opposite Party No.2 and instead abused him with the name of his caste with an intention to humiliate and intimidate him and also assaulted him.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the complaint and the material collected during the course of enquiry, no offence is disclosed against the applicants 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 complaint and the material collected during the course of enquiry, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicants and as such, impugned order 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 summoning order as well as entire proceedings is therefore refused.
However, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided as expeditiously as possible after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties.
With the aforesaid observations, this application under Section 482 CrPC is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 11.9.2019 Zafar