Court No. - 45 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19969 of 2010 Petitioner :- Smt. Chandra Bala Choudhary And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Another Petitioner Counsel :- A.C.Nigam Respondent Counsel :- Govt.Advocate Hon'ble Rajesh Dayal Khare, J.
List revised. None appears on behalf of the applicants to press the present 482
petition. Learned A.G.A. is present.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. petition has been filed for quashing the charge sheet
dated 8.1.1997, in criminal case no.2407 of 2006, under Sections 406, 420
IPC, pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate-IX, Kanpur-Nagar.
The contention as raised by the applicants in the petition is that the applicants
have no knowledge of the pending proceedings and it was only known when
the applicant no.2 was arrested on 30.3.2010. As the applicant no.1 is a lady,
therefore, in the interest of justice her bail application be considered on the
same day by the Court below, if possible.
The contention on behalf of 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.
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 Sections 239, 245(2) or 227/228, Cr.P.C. as the case may 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 charge sheet is hereby refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the
court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, then the bail
application of the applicant no.1 shall be considered by the Court below on
the same day if possible, and for remaining applicant his prayer for bail shall
be considered in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of
Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 and
in a recent decision in Criminal Appeal No. 538 of 2009, Lal Kamlendra
Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. 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 of.
Order Date :- 28.7.2010
Hasnain