State v. Arvind Yadav), arising out of Case Crime No
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:125576 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 17867 of 2024 Applicant :- Arvind Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Babu Ram Yadav,Om Prakash Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Legal Reasoning
1. Heard Mr. Sameer Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Babu Ram Yadav, learned counsel for applicant as well as Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record. 2. The present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the impugned Summoning order dated 22.04.2024 passed by Special Judge (POCSO Act), Azamgarh in Special Session Trial No.206 of 2023 (State vs. Arvind Yadav), arising out of Case Crime No.85 of 2023, under Sections 354, 504, 506 I.P.C., Section 9M/10 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Kaptanganj, District- Azamgarh and further prayer to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case. 3. As per the allegations in the FIR lodged on 07.04.2023 at 13:24 hours, under Sections 354, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3(1)(द), 3(1)(ध) and 3(2)(va) SC/ST Act against the applicant and two unknown persons with the allegations that on 18.03.2023 at about 6 O'clock in the evening when the informant's daughter was coming to her house after attending coaching on a bicycle, in front of Junior High School, the applicant alongwith two other persons intercepted the informant's daughter and uttered objectionable words. He caught the hand of the child and when she tried to scream, he pressed her mouth, used un-parliamentary language and threatened for dire consequences in case she tried to shout. The informant's daughter leaving the bicycle ran away from the place of incident. In the FIR, details about earlier incidents have also been narrated regarding behavior of the applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case, as he contests elections and due to political party bandi, he has been implicated in the present case to ruin his political carrier. He further submits that there are contradictions in the version of the FIR, statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., thus the entire story appears to be false and fabricated. He further submits that the incident is said to happen in front of Junior High School which is a very busy place and there is no probability of any such incident happening at such a busy place. He further submits that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a mala fide intention for the purpose of causing harassment. He, therefore, submits that the summoning order as well as entire proceedings be quashed by this Court as the same is an abuse process of Court. 5. Learned AGA on the other hand submits that from the version of the FIR as well as statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. of the victim who is a minor girl, it is clear that un- parliamentary language as well as caste indicative words have been used by the applicant and he has also misbehaved with the girls by catching hold of her hand and other parts of the body as is evident from the statements of Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. He further submits that all the contentions raised by the applicants' counsel relate to disputed questions of fact. On the basis of material on record after conducting of statutory investigation under Chapter XII Cr.P.C. by the investigating officer, a strong prima facie case is made out against the applicant for the commission of the alleged incident. In support of his case, learned AGA has placed reliance upon the judgments of the Apex Court in the case of Dilbag Rai Vs. State of Haryana & Others reported in AIR 2019 (SC) 693 and Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. Arvind Khanna reported in MANU/SC/1432/2019. 6. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the present application. 7. This Court finds that the submissions made by the applicants' learned counsel call for adjudication on pure questions of fact which may adequately be adjudicated upon only by the trial court and while doing so even the submissions made on points of law can also be more appropriately gone into by the trial court in this case. The issue whether it is appropriate for this Court being the Highest Court to exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the charge-sheet and the proceedings at the stage when the Magistrate has merely issued process against the applicants and trial is to yet to come only on the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicants that present criminal case initiated by opposite party no.2 are not only malicious but also abuse of process of law has elaborately been discussed by the Apex Court in the following judgments:- (i) R.P. Kapur Versus State of Punjab; AIR 1960 SC 866, (ii) State of Haryana & Ors. Versus Ch. Bhajan Lal & Ors.;1992 Supp.(1) SCC 335, (iii) State of Bihar & Anr. Versus P.P. Sharma & Anr.; 1992 Supp (1) SCC 222, (iv) Zandu Pharmaceuticals Works Ltd. & Ors. Versus Mohammad Shariful Haque & Anr.; 2005 (1) SCC 122, (v) M. N. Ojha Vs. Alok Kumar Srivastava; 2009 (9) SCC 682, (vi) Mohd. Allauddin Khan Vs. The State of Bihar & Others; 2019 0 Supreme (SC) 454, (vii) Nallapareddy Sridhar Reddy Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.; 2020 0 Supreme (SC) 45, and laslty (viii) Rajeev Kaurav Vs. Balasahab & Others; 2020 0 Supreme (SC) 143. 8. In view of the aforesaid, this Court does not deem it proper, and therefore cannot be persuaded to have a pre-trial before the actual trial begins. A threadbare discussion of various facts and circumstances, as they emerge from the allegations made against the accused, is being purposely avoided by the Court for the reason, lest the same might cause any prejudice to either side during trial. But it shall suffice to observe that 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 there appear to be sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. I do not find any justification to quash the charge sheet or the proceedings against the applicants arising out of them as the case does not fall in any of the categories recognized by the Apex Court which may justify their quashing. 9. The prayer for quashing the summoning order dated 22.04.2024 as well as the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case are refused, as I do not see any abuse of the court's process at this pre-trial stage. 10. The present application has no merit and is, accordingly, rejected. Order Date :- 5.8.2024/Kalp Nath Singh