Awadhesh Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Hon''ble Bala Krishna Narayana, J.—Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava for the complainant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record

The present 482 Cr.P.C. petition has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 3612 of 2010 (Mamta v Awadhesh Yadav & another) pending in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandauli initiated under sections 498-A IPC and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Dhanapur, District Chandauli along with his order dated 02.01.12 on which learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the aforesaid offences.

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 submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court 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 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 defense of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicant has got a right of discharge u/s 245 Cr.P.C. 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 entire proceedings of the aforesaid complaint case along with the impugned order is refused.

However, it is directed that if the applicant appear and surrender 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 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 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. For a period of 30 days from today 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.