Dismissed

Golu v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC12 Jun 2019A482/22557/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court refused to quash quashable the criminal proceedings initiated under the PoCSO and IPC sections based on an FIR alleging molestation. The Court held that factual disputes cannot be resolved at this stage. The applicant was directed to surrender within 30 days to consider bail.

What did the court decide?

Application refused. Applicant directed to surrender within 30 days to consider bail; coercive action barred for this period if present.

Golu Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 2

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22557 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Golu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Shashi Dhar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Shashi Dhar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri I.P. Rajpoot, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the proceeding in Spl. Case No. 09 of 2019 as well as charge sheet arising out of Case Crime No. 1231 of 2017, under Sections 354-Ka, 452 I.P.C. and 7/8 P.O.C.S.O. Act, P.S. New Agra, District Agra.

¶7

The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the accused applicant has been falsely implicated in this case; the applicant is a neighbour of the O.P. No.2 whose daughter is said to have been molested by the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant further stated that no such occurrence has taken place; if proceedings are allowed to continue, that would amount to an abuse of process of court.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing of the charge sheet.

¶9

Perusal of the F.I.R. indicates that the daughter of the opposite party no.2 aged about 14 years was molested by applicant by entering her house and after investigation, the charge-sheet has been submitted by the police.

¶10

The arguments which are made by the learned counsel for the applicant are related to factual aspect which cannot be seen at this stage in the proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶11

From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of this case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the Bar relates to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases of R. P. Kapur vs. The State Of Punjab, AIR

¶12

1960 SC 866, State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, AIR 1992 SC 604, State of Bihar and Anr. Vs. P.P. Sharma, AIR 1991 SC 1260 lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Md. Sharaful Haque and Ors., AIR 2005 SC 9 . The disputed defense of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.

¶13

The prayer for quashing the proceedings is refused.

¶14

However, it is provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail may be considered and decided 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 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. 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 applicant. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.

¶15

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.

¶16

Order Date :- 12.6.2019 A. Mandhani

Golu v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Golu v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shani Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mahesh Harijan @ Mahesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Aadil Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Sher Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd. Arif Vs State of U.P. and Anr.