Court No. - 45 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18787 of 2010 Petitioner :- Mr. Kallan Khan And Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others Petitioner Counsel :- S.M.Haider Zaidi Respondent Counsel :- Govt.Advocate Hon'ble Rajesh Dayal Khare,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. petition has been filed for quashing proceedings of of
Case No. 2284 of 2003, under Sections 323, 504 I.P.C., Police Station
Deoband, District Saharanpur, pending before Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Deoband, District Saharanpur and also for quashing the charge
sheet dated 21.12.2002.
The contention of the counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the
applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a
malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain
documents and statements in support of his contention.It is further contended
that the wife of the opposite party no.2 had initiated the proceedings under
Section 125 Cr.P.C., 498A I.P.C., and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, as well
as under Section 406 I.P.C., as a counter blast to the same, the opposite party
no.2 initiated the present proceedings against the applicants which is bad in
law.
From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the
case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the
applicants. All the submission made at the bar relates to the disputed question
of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482
Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law
laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab,
A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426,
State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu
Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10)
2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be
considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicants have got right of discharge
under Section 239 or 227/228 or 245 Cr.P.C. as the case may be through a
proper application for the said purpose and they are free to take all the
submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.
The prayer for quashing the summoning order is refused.
However, since the charged Sections are bailable, it is directed that the
applicants shall appear before the court below within 30 days from today and
apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided as
expeditiously as possible, if possible, on the same day by the Court below.
For a period of 30 days from today or till the disposal of the application for
grant of bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the
applicants. However in case the applicants do not appear before the Court
below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed off.
Order Date :- 23.7.2010
S.Ali