Meva Lal and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Karuna Nand Bajpayee, J.—The application u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by applicants Meva Lal and Ram Dulari for quashing the charge sheet dated 29.06.2013 submitted in Case Crime No. 1290 of 2013 (State v. Vipin and others) arising out of in Case Crime No. 280 of 2013 u/s. 498A, 323, 324, 506 I.P.C. & 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Akbarpur, District Kanpur Dehat pending in the Court of C.J.M., Kanpur Dehat. Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

The submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants involve several intricate factual details and many disputed questions of fact related to the case. False implication due to malafide intention has been pleaded.

The law regarding the sufficiency of the material which may justify the summoning and the court''s decision to proceed against the accused in a given case is well settled. The court has to eschew itself from embarking upon a roving enquiry into the last details of the case. It is also not advisable to adjudge whether the case shall ultimately end in conviction or not. Only a prima facie satisfaction of the court about the existence of sufficient ground to proceed in the matter is required.

The quashing of the charge sheet or the proceeding consequent thereupon may be done only if the F.I.R. and the evidence or material collected by the Investigating Officer does not disclose any offence or if there is any legal bar which prohibits the proceedings on its basis. The Apex Court decisions in 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 Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and Others Vs. Md. Sharaful Haque and Others, make the position of law in this regard clear.

The perusal of the F.I.R. and the material collected by the Investigating Officer on the basis of which the charge sheet has been submitted makes out a prima facie case against the accused at this stage and I do not find any justification to quash the charge sheet or the proceedings against the applicants arising out of them.

The prayer for quashing the same is refused as I do not see any abuse of the court''s process either.

However, in the peculiar circumstances of the matter, it is directed that in case the applicants appear before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail be considered and decided in the light of the law laid down by this Court in the case of Amarawati and Another (Smt.) Vs. State of U.P., and also in the light of the judgment of Hon''ble Supreme Court reported in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others, .

It is further directed that no coercive measures shall be adopted against the applicants in the aforesaid period of 30 days or till the date of their appearance before the court below, whichever is earlier.

It is made clear that no application for extension of time shall be entertained if the applicants do not avail of this order in the stipulated period of time. With the aforesaid directions this application is finally disposed off.