High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:124342 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 21878 of 2024 Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vijai Prakash Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Legal Reasoning
Heard Mr. Vijai Prakash Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Mayank Awasthi, learned counsel for the State as well as perused the entire material available on record. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge-sheet bearing No.128/2023 dated 04.02.2024 and cognizance/summoning order dated 01.03.2024 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.116 of 2024 (State Vs. Brijesh Kumar), arising out of Case Crime No. 136 of 2023, under Sections 354kha I.P.C., Police Station-Sujanganj, District-Jaunpur, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Second), Jaunpur. As per the allegations in the FIR, lodged by the victim herself against the applicant on 19.06.2023 at about 20:28 hrs under Section 354Kha alleging therein that on 18.06.2023 at about 11:30 p.m. when the victim had gone for natural call, one Brijesh Kumar reached there and caught hold the victim's hand, pressed her breast and when she tried to catch him, he ran away. The statement of victim u/s 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded on 27.06.2023, whereas statement U/s 164 Cr.P.C. has been recorded on 11.07.2023. After investigation, charge sheet has been submitted under Section 354Kha, pursuant to which, the applicant has been summoned. Hence, the present application has been filed. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He further submits that while summoning the applicant, the statement of victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has not been considered in which the victim has not made any allegation against the applicant as she has stated that she does not know the applicant and she had not seen him at the time of alleged incident. He further submits that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of causing harassment. He further submits that the summoning order has been passed in a mechanical manner without considering the statement of the victim U/s 164 Cr.P.C. He, therefore, submits that the charge-sheet, summoning order as well as entire proceedings be quashed by this Court as the same is an abuse process of Court. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and the learned A.G.A. for the State have opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants by submitting that the FIR has been lodged by the victim herself in which she has clearly stated as to how she was caught and molested by the applicant. Her statement U/s 161 Cr.P.C. has recorded on 27.06.2023 wherein she has also supported the version of the FIR. It appears that under pressure of the applicant or some other persons, the version of statement U/s 164 Cr.P.C. has been diluted, which has been recorded after nearly one month of lodging of the FIR. There is no illegality in the order as the same has been passed after considering the version of FIR, which has been lodged by the victim herself as well as statement U/s 161 Cr.P.C. He further submits that all the contentions raised by the applicant's 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. in MANU/SC/1432/2019. Arvind Khanna reported I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the present application. This Court finds that the submissions made by the applicant's 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 (ix) Rajeev Kaurav Vs. Balasahab & Others; 2020 0 Supreme (SC) 143. 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. The prayer for quashing the impugned charge-sheet dated 04.02.2024 and summoning order dated 01.03.2024 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. The present application has no merit and is, accordingly, rejected. Order Date :- 1.8.2024 Jitendra/-