State v. Kelvin Kumar alias Bhanta), arising out of Crime No

Heard Mr. R.K Singh Gaharwar, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed with the prayer to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 20.08.2023 along with Cognizance/Summoning order dated 11.04.2024 and the entire proceedings of Session Case No.1305 of 2024 (State vs. Kelvin Kumar alias Bhanta), arising out of Crime No.237 of 2023, under Sections 452, 354, 323, 325, 504 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(va) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station- Chharra, District- Aligarh, pending in the court of Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act)/Additional Session Judge, District- aligarh Brief facts of the case are that an FIR has been lodged on 29.06.2023 at 18:39 hours by opposite party no.2 against the applicant with the allegations that the wedding procession (baraat) of son of opposite party no.2 had gone on 27.06.2023 and the opposite party no.2 was at her house making preparation for welcoming her daughter-in-law. At about 8:00am, the applicant forcefully entered the house of opposite party no.2 and abused her saying " ससलल धधबलननयस" stating about some case in which she had not cooperated. He also threatened to molest her daughters. Having danda in his hand, he assaulted the opposite party no.2 due to which she sustained injuries. Others details of molestation of opposite party no.2 have been mentioned in the FIR. After investigation, charge sheet has been submitted and the applicant has been summoned. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent. He further submits that the present FIR has been lodged with false and frivolous allegations. The applicant is a student of M.Sc. and to ruin his carrier, the present case has been lodged. He further contends that there is no independent witness to support the allegations as made against the applicant in the present FIR. He also submits that several other cases have been lodged from the side of opposite party no.2 against the applicant. He further submits that no offence against the applicant 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 charge-sheet, cognizance/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 on the other hand submits that from the version of the FIR, statement of charge sheet witnesses as well as statement of victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., prima facie offence is made out against the applicant. The medical also supports the version of the FIR. He also submits that injuries have been sustained by the opposite party no.2 and the caste indicative words have also been used. He further submits that all the contentions raised by the applicant's counsel relates 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 A.G.A. 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. 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 calls 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 528 BNSS to quash the charge-sheet and the proceedings at the stage when the Magistrate has merely issued process against the applicant and trial is to yet to come only on the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant that present criminal case initiated by opposite party no.2 is 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 lastly (viii) 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 applicant arising out of it 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 20.08.2023 and cognizance/summoning order dated 11.04.2024 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. The present application has no merit and is, accordingly, rejected. Order Date :- 20.5.2025 Kalp Nath Singh

Heard Mr. R.K Singh Gaharwar, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed with the prayer to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 20.08.2023 along with Cognizance/Summoning order dated 11.04.2024 and the entire proceedings of Session Case No.1305 of 2024 (State vs. Kelvin Kumar alias Bhanta), arising out of Crime No.237 of 2023, under Sections 452, 354, 323, 325, 504 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(va) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station- Chharra, District- Aligarh, pending in the court of Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act)/Additional Session Judge, District- aligarh Brief facts of the case are that an FIR has been lodged on 29.06.2023 at 18:39 hours by opposite party no.2 against the applicant with the allegations that the wedding procession (baraat) of son of opposite party no.2 had gone on 27.06.2023 and the opposite party no.2 was at her house making preparation for welcoming her daughter-in-law. At about 8:00am, the applicant forcefully entered the house of opposite party no.2 and abused her saying " ससलल धधबलननयस" stating about some case in which she had not cooperated. He also threatened to molest her daughters. Having danda in his hand, he assaulted the opposite party no.2 due to which she sustained injuries. Others details of molestation of opposite party no.2 have been mentioned in the FIR. After investigation, charge sheet has been submitted and the applicant has been summoned. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent. He further submits that the present FIR has been lodged with false and frivolous allegations. The applicant is a student of M.Sc. and to ruin his carrier, the present case has been lodged. He further contends that there is no independent witness to support the allegations as made against the applicant in the present FIR. He also submits that several other cases have been lodged from the side of opposite party no.2 against the applicant. He further submits that no offence against the applicant 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 charge-sheet, cognizance/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 on the other hand submits that from the version of the FIR, statement of charge sheet witnesses as well as statement of victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., prima facie offence is made out against the applicant. The medical also supports the version of the FIR. He also submits that injuries have been sustained by the opposite party no.2 and the caste indicative words have also been used. He further submits that all the contentions raised by the applicant's counsel relates 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 A.G.A. 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. 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 calls 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 528 BNSS to quash the charge-sheet and the proceedings at the stage when the Magistrate has merely issued process against the applicant and trial is to yet to come only on the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant that present criminal case initiated by opposite party no.2 is 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 lastly (viii) 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 applicant arising out of it 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 20.08.2023 and cognizance/summoning order dated 11.04.2024 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. The present application has no merit and is, accordingly, rejected. Order Date :- 20.5.2025 Kalp Nath Singh