Allahabad High Court High Court

Shakuntala vs State Of U.P.& 2 Ors. on 27 July, 2010

Allahabad High Court
Shakuntala vs State Of U.P.& 2 Ors. on 27 July, 2010
Court No. - 5

Case :- U/S 482/378/407 No. - 524 of 2007

Petitioner :- Shakuntala
Respondent :- State Of U.P.& 2 Ors.
Petitioner Counsel :- Dinesh K. Srivastava
Respondent Counsel :- Govt.Advocate

Hon'ble Vedpal,J.

This petition under Section 482/483 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner
for quashing the charge sheet submitted by police in Case No. 647 of 2006
(Crime No. 194-A of 2006) under Section 436 I.P.C. State Vs. Shakuntala in
the Court of Civil Judge Junior Division, Ambedkar Nagar along with the
summoning order.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned AGA for the State
and perused the record of the case.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had
earlier lodged an F.I.R. against opposite party no.3 Kalawati and this F.I.R.
of Case Crime No. 194-A of 2006 is a counterblast to the F.I.R. lodged by the
petitioner and no incident had ever taken place and applicant has been falsely
implicated in this case and as such the proceeding should be quashed.

Learned AGA opposed the petition by contending that there was sufficient
material against the applicant so the charge sheet was submitted against him.

Considered the respective submissions made by the parties. The chargesheet
was submitted by the police after detailed investigation in the matter.
Statement of witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded at length. It is
settled law that inherent power to quash the chargesheet, should not be
exercised to stifle the legitimate prosecution. It would be erroneous to assess
the reliability of the witnesses at this stage. A perusal of the record prima
facie discloses the commission of cognizance offence for which chargesheet
has been submitted. There is nothing on record to show that proceedings is
malafide, frivolous or vexatious. In these circumstances, there appears no
sufficient ground to interfere in the matter and the progress of the trial, before
the court below.

The petition is devoid of merit dismissed.

However, it is provided that if the petitioner surrenders before the court below
within ten days and moves an application for bail, the same shall be
considered and disposed of by the courts below, expeditiously.

Order Date :- 27.7.2010
Mahesh