Allahabad High Court
Abid Raza Khan And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 10 July, 2020
Author: Rajiv Gupta
Bench: Rajiv Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3191 of 2020 Applicant :- Abid Raza Khan And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Kumar 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 CrPC has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the Charge-Sheet dated 29.05.2019, cognizance order dated 17.06.2019 and entire proceedings of Case No. 256 of 2019 (State Vs. Abid Raza Khan and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 86 of 2019, under Section 366 IPC, Police Station C.B. Ganj, District Bareilly, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IV, Bareilly.
As per the allegations made in the FIR, it is alleged that the applicants in connivance with the co-accused Rizwan had taken away the victim against her will.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the FIR and the statement of the witnesses, 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 FIR and the statement of the witnesses, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicants and as such, 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 charge-sheet, cognizance order and entire proceedings is therefore refused.
However, it is directed that if the applicants appear/ surrender before the court below within 45 days from today and apply for bail, their 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 45days from today or till the applicants surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against them. However in case, the applicants do not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
With the aforesaid observations, this application under Section 482 CrPC is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 10.7.2020 Nadim