Court No. - 18 Case :- U/S 482/378/407 No. - 3158 of 2010 Petitioner :- Sunder Lal And 8 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Petitioner Counsel :- Ashok Kumar Verma,Durgesh Kumar Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble S.N.H. Zaidi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and
perused the record.
The applicants, through the present application filed under section 482
Cr.P.C., have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with the prayer
that the proceedings of Complaint Case No.2124, under sections 323, 504,
506, 392, 427, 452, 509 I.P.C., Police Station Ajgain District Unnao, pending
in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Unnao,, be quashed.
The contention of the learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence is
disclosed against the applicants and the present prosecution has been
instituted with malafide intentions for the purposes of harassment.
From the perusal of 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 submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed questions of fact,
which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under sections 482 Cr.P.C. At
this stage only a prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid
down by the Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Versus State of Punjab,
AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Versus Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr) 426,
State of Bihar versus P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr) 192, and lately Zandu
Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Versus Mohd. Saraful Haqe 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 a right of
discharge under section 239 Cr.P.C., 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.
In the event such an application is filed within one month from today, the trial
court is directed to consider and dispose it off within a period of two months
from the date of it’s filing.
The prayer for quashing the proceeding is refused.
It is also directed that if the applicants surrender before the trial court within
fifteen days from today and move for bail, the bail prayer of the applicants
shall be considered by the courts below in the light of the law laid down by
the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State
of U.P. and others reported in 2009(2)SCC(Cri) Page 330.
With the aforesaid direction, the application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 11.8.2010
ank