High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:145479 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28518 of 2024 Applicant :- Buddhiram And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Indrakesh Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Legal Reasoning
Heard Mr. Indrakesh Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Mayank Awasthi, learned A.G.A. 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 dated 15.02.2022 arising out of N.C.R. No.06 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 427 IPC, Police Station-Dudhara, District-Sant Kabir Nagar and cognizance order dated 13.01.2023, pending before the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sant Kabir Nagar. Brief facts of the case are that for the incident dated 08.01.2022, an N.C.R. has been lodged by opposite party no.2; Subhash Chandra, wherein it has been alleged that due to some old enmity, the applicants came to the house of opposite party no.2 and started using abusive language. When the opposite party no.2 objected to the same, the applicants assaulted him with hand and fists. When brother and Bhabhi of opposite party no.2 intervened, the applicants abused and assaulted them. For the same incident, the applicant no.1 has also lodged the N.C.R. After investigation, charge sheet has been submitted on 15.02.2022, on which cognizance has been taken by the court concerned vide order dated 13.01.2023. Hence the present application has bee filed. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that due to old enmity, the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case in which they have sustained injuries. The opposite party no.2 has also sustained many injuries. He further submits that the civil dispute is pending between the parties and in order to give a criminal colour to the civil dispute, the present case has been lodged. Therefore, the continuance of criminal proceedings in such case is nothing but abuse of process of law. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Naresh Kumar and Anr. vs. The State of Karnataka & Anr. reported in (2024) 3 SCR 740 : 2024 INSC 196. He further submits that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of causing harassment. He further submits that the applicants have sustained injuries in the alleged incident, therefore, the present case has been lodged as a counterblast in order to pressurize the applicants to withdraw the earlier case lodged against the accused therein not to proceed with the case. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. 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 A.G.A. for the State has opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants by submitting that for the incident dated 08.01.2022, the N.C.R. has been lodged from both side, wherein both sides have received injuries. At this stage, it is not possible to decide who is the aggressor. 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 applicants 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. The judgment as cited by the counsel for the applicants is not applicable in the present case where the incident is admitted by the applicants, who has also proceeded to lodge an NCR and also stated that in the alleged incident, they have sustained injuries. 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 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 (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 15.02.2022 and cognizance order dated 13.01.2023 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 :- 4.9.2024 Jitendra/-