AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 368 wordsBala Krishna Narayana, J.—Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State. The applicants, by means of this application u/s 482 Cr.P.C., have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the charge-sheet dated 17.10.2007 laid in Criminal Case no. 504, 2013, arising out of Case Crime no. 660 of 2012, P.S. Kotwali, district-Kannauj on which learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kannauj has taken cognizance for the offenses punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants 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.
Learned A.G.A. submitted that 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 and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, , 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 applicants have got a right of discharge through a proper application for the said purpose and they are free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court including those which have been canvassed by him before this Court in this application.
The submissions made by learned A.G.A. have force.
Accordingly the prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforementioned case is refused.
However, it is provided that in case the applicants move an application for discharge along with certified copy of this order before the court concerned, the same shall be dealt with in accordance with law at appropriate stage. With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
