The quashing of the charge sheet and the entire proceedings can also vs In the absence of any of the grounds recognized by the Apex Court

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Akhilesh Kumar Awasthi, learned counsel for the N.C.B., Lucknow.

2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is filed with the prayer to quash the order dated 25.11.2024 passed by Additional District Judge, Court No.6, Lakhimpur Kheri in Criminal Case No. 175/2022 arising out in N.C.B. Crime No.09/2022 under Sections 8/20/29 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station N.C.B., Lucknow, District Lakhimpur Kheri.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that not even a single evidence was collected by the ofÏcers of N.C.B. before filing complaint in question and complaint was filed in the most mechanical manner. He further submits that Application U/S 482 No.2730 of 2024 was filed before this Court, which was disposed of with the liberty to the applicant to file discharge application before the competent authority, same was filed but it was rejected in the most mechanical manner by the learned court below.

4. The order dated 26.4.2024 passed in Application U/S 482 No.2730 of 2024 reads as under :- Heard Sri Sudhakar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Akhilesh Kumar Awasthi, learned counsel for the NCB and perused the record. The instant Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved by the applicant with a prayer to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 26.08.2022 and summoning order dated 13.09.2022 alongwith entire proceedings of NCB Crime Case No.09/2022, under Sections 8/22/29 of NDPS Act, Police Station NCB Lucknow. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a reputed person in the society and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to rivalry. He further submits that the impugned proceedings pending before the learned trial court are totally arbitrary and illegal and the same have been instituted without considering the material evidence available on record. Thus, he submits that entire criminal proceedings initiated against the applicant may be quashed. Learned counsel for the applicant also prays for permission to appear through counsel before the concerned trial court within a period of three weeks from today and move an application claiming discharge on behalf of the applicant and this Court may direct the trial court to decide the application so moved by the applicant. Learned counsel for the NCB has disputed the aforesaid contentions made by learned counsel for the applicant but he has not opposed the request made by learned counsel for the applicant to move a discharge application before the trial court through counsel. All the contentions raised by the applicant's counsel relate to disputed questions of fact. The court has also been called upon to adjudge the testimonial worth of prosecution evidence and evaluate the same on the basis of various intricacies of factual details which have been touched upon by learned counsel. The veracity and credibility of material furnished on behalf of the prosecution has been questioned and false implication has been pleaded. In the process of invoking its inherent jurisdiction, this court cannot be persuaded to have a pre trial before the actual trial begins. The submissions made by the learned counsel call for adjudication on pure questions of fact which may be adequately 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 quashing of the charge sheet and the entire proceedings can also be done only if it does not disclose any offence or if there is any legal bar which prohibits the proceedings on its basis. The Apex Court decisions in the case of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 SCC(Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and also in Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283 make the position of law in this regard clear. In the absence of any of the grounds recognized by the Apex Court which might justify the quashing of charge sheet/summoning order/impugned proceedings, the prayer for quashing the same is refused as I do not see any abuse of the courts process either. The trial court has been vested with sufÏcient powers to discharge the accused even before the stage to frame the charges comes, if for reasons to be recorded it considers the charge to be groundless. As requested by learned counsel for the applicant, the permission to appear through counsel before the concerned trial court within a period of three weeks from today and move an application claiming discharge on behalf of whom this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved, is granted. The concerned trial court shall after hearing the counsel decide the application on merits in accordance with law within a period which shall not exceed a period of two months from today. With the above observations, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. stands disposed of.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that thereafter discharge application was also filed by the applicant but the same was rejected in the most mechanical manner without dealing the contents of the discharge application in proper manner, therefore, indulgence of this Court is necessary.

6. Sri Akhilesh Kumar Awasthi, learned counsel for the N.C.B., Lucknow conceded this fact that contents of the discharge application have not been considered in proper manner and he has no objection in case present application is allowed with liberty to the learned court below to decide the discharge application afresh.

7. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, going through the contents of the application as well as other relevant documents, as the impugned order clearly reveals that contents of the discharge application were not properly considered by the court below and counsel for the N.C.B. have no objection, in case, the present application is allowed with liberty to the learned court below to decide the discharge application afresh, therefore, order dated 25.11.2024 passed by Additional District Judge, Court No.6, Lakhimpur Kheri in Criminal Case No. 175/2022 arising out in N.C.B. Crime No.09/2022 under Sections 8/20/29 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station N.C.B., Lucknow, District Lakhimpur Kheri is hereby, set aside with the direction to the learned court below to decide the discharge application of the applicant afresh by a reasoned and speaking order after taking objection from the ofÏcials of N.C.B.

8. With the above observations, the present application is allowed.

9. Till the disposal of discharge application, no coercive steps be taken against the applicant. Order Date :- 13.1.2025 Gaurav/- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Akhilesh Kumar Awasthi, learned counsel for the N.C.B., Lucknow.

2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is filed with the prayer to quash the order dated 25.11.2024 passed by Additional District Judge, Court No.6, Lakhimpur Kheri in Criminal Case No. 175/2022 arising out in N.C.B. Crime No.09/2022 under Sections 8/20/29 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station N.C.B., Lucknow, District Lakhimpur Kheri.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that not even a single evidence was collected by the ofÏcers of N.C.B. before filing complaint in question and complaint was filed in the most mechanical manner. He further submits that Application U/S 482 No.2730 of 2024 was filed before this Court, which was disposed of with the liberty to the applicant to file discharge application before the competent authority, same was filed but it was rejected in the most mechanical manner by the learned court below.

4. The order dated 26.4.2024 passed in Application U/S 482 No.2730 of 2024 reads as under :- Heard Sri Sudhakar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Akhilesh Kumar Awasthi, learned counsel for the NCB and perused the record. The instant Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved by the applicant with a prayer to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 26.08.2022 and summoning order dated 13.09.2022 alongwith entire proceedings of NCB Crime Case No.09/2022, under Sections 8/22/29 of NDPS Act, Police Station NCB Lucknow. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a reputed person in the society and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to rivalry. He further submits that the impugned proceedings pending before the learned trial court are totally arbitrary and illegal and the same have been instituted without considering the material evidence available on record. Thus, he submits that entire criminal proceedings initiated against the applicant may be quashed. Learned counsel for the applicant also prays for permission to appear through counsel before the concerned trial court within a period of three weeks from today and move an application claiming discharge on behalf of the applicant and this Court may direct the trial court to decide the application so moved by the applicant. Learned counsel for the NCB has disputed the aforesaid contentions made by learned counsel for the applicant but he has not opposed the request made by learned counsel for the applicant to move a discharge application before the trial court through counsel. All the contentions raised by the applicant's counsel relate to disputed questions of fact. The court has also been called upon to adjudge the testimonial worth of prosecution evidence and evaluate the same on the basis of various intricacies of factual details which have been touched upon by learned counsel. The veracity and credibility of material furnished on behalf of the prosecution has been questioned and false implication has been pleaded. In the process of invoking its inherent jurisdiction, this court cannot be persuaded to have a pre trial before the actual trial begins. The submissions made by the learned counsel call for adjudication on pure questions of fact which may be adequately 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 quashing of the charge sheet and the entire proceedings can also be done only if it does not disclose any offence or if there is any legal bar which prohibits the proceedings on its basis. The Apex Court decisions in the case of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 SCC(Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and also in Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283 make the position of law in this regard clear. In the absence of any of the grounds recognized by the Apex Court which might justify the quashing of charge sheet/summoning order/impugned proceedings, the prayer for quashing the same is refused as I do not see any abuse of the courts process either. The trial court has been vested with sufÏcient powers to discharge the accused even before the stage to frame the charges comes, if for reasons to be recorded it considers the charge to be groundless. As requested by learned counsel for the applicant, the permission to appear through counsel before the concerned trial court within a period of three weeks from today and move an application claiming discharge on behalf of whom this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved, is granted. The concerned trial court shall after hearing the counsel decide the application on merits in accordance with law within a period which shall not exceed a period of two months from today. With the above observations, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. stands disposed of.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that thereafter discharge application was also filed by the applicant but the same was rejected in the most mechanical manner without dealing the contents of the discharge application in proper manner, therefore, indulgence of this Court is necessary.

6. Sri Akhilesh Kumar Awasthi, learned counsel for the N.C.B., Lucknow conceded this fact that contents of the discharge application have not been considered in proper manner and he has no objection in case present application is allowed with liberty to the learned court below to decide the discharge application afresh.

7. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, going through the contents of the application as well as other relevant documents, as the impugned order clearly reveals that contents of the discharge application were not properly considered by the court below and counsel for the N.C.B. have no objection, in case, the present application is allowed with liberty to the learned court below to decide the discharge application afresh, therefore, order dated 25.11.2024 passed by Additional District Judge, Court No.6, Lakhimpur Kheri in Criminal Case No. 175/2022 arising out in N.C.B. Crime No.09/2022 under Sections 8/20/29 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station N.C.B., Lucknow, District Lakhimpur Kheri is hereby, set aside with the direction to the learned court below to decide the discharge application of the applicant afresh by a reasoned and speaking order after taking objection from the ofÏcials of N.C.B.

8. With the above observations, the present application is allowed.

9. Till the disposal of discharge application, no coercive steps be taken against the applicant. Order Date :- 13.1.2025 Gaurav/- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench