Ashok Mishra vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Dayal Khare, J.—Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

This application u/s 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Criminal Complaint Case No. 4921 of 2012 under Sections 323, 392, 506 IPC, police station Robertsganj, district Sonbhadra and to quash the summoning order dated 15.1.2014 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonbhadra.

Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of this Court to annexure-2 to the affidavit accompanying this application, which is police report and according to which, no such incident ever took place and the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The contention of the counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

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 applicant. All the submission made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of power conferred u/s 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. The State of Punjab, , State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and another Shri S.A. Khan, , State of Bihar and Another Vs. P.P. Sharma, IAS and Another, and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and Others Vs. Md. Sharaful Haque and Others, . The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicant has got a right of discharge u/s 239 or 227/228 or 245 Cr.P.C. as the case may be through a proper application for the said purpose and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.

The prayer for quashing the proceedings and order dated 15.1.2014 is refused.

However, it is provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, then the bail application of the applicant 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 judgment passed by Hon''ble Apex Court reported in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others, . 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.