Rajendra Rai and Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Chandra, J.—This is a petition u/s 482 Code of Criminal Procedure in which a prayer has been made that the proceeding of criminal case No. 713 of 1992 pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Mohammadabad, District Ghazipur may be quashed.

A perusal of the papers filed in this petition indicates that the charge sheet was submitted against the accused applicants for the offence u/s 143, 436, 429 and 427 I.P.C. and the accused applicants were summoned vide order dated 23.6.1986.

The learned Counsel for the applicant argued that the charge sheet has been submitted by the Investigating Officer without collecting any evidence and as such the same is liable to be quashed.

The learned A.G.A. on the other hand argued that the Investigating Officer properly investigated the case and after collection of the evidence submitted one charge sheet against five accused applicants and another charge sheet against the sixth accused applicant. His contention is that there is sufficient material on record to show the commission of the crime for which charge sheet was submitted.

The applicants have not filed any documents in this petition so as to elaborate this argument that there is no material on record for summoning of the accused.

In the absence of any document it cannot be assumed that the charge sheet has been filed without collecting any evidence. However, the applicants have filed a report from C.B., C.I.D. in which it has been mentioned that the occurrence as alleged in the F.I.R. did not take place. However, this report has been submitted after the filing of the charge sheet in the Court.

I have considered over the matter and I feel that there is no case for quashing the charge sheet or for setting aside the order summoning the accused applicants. However, the applicants shall be having an opportunity to make the submission for their discharge in the lower court at the appropriate stage. With above observations the petition u/s 482 Code of Criminal Procedure is dismissed. If the applicants surrender before the trial court within three weeks from today, their bail application shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously in view of the judgment pronounced by this Court in Amrawati and Anr. v. State of UP 2004 (57) ALR 290, affirmed by the Supreme Court in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh v. State of UP 2009 (2) Crime 4 (SC).

The office is directed to send a copy of this order to the lower court by Fax and by R.P.A.D. Order Date: