Sonu @ Mohammad Shamsher and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2020) — LawSathi Research

Sonu @ Mohammad Shamsher and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2020) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer to quash the chargesheet and proceedings refused; applicants granted thirty days to surrender before the court below and apply for bail (bail application to be considered per settled law), with no coercive action against them for thirty days and no further time for surrender.

Issue for consideration

Whether the chargesheet and the entire proceedings in Case No. 3735 of 2018, arising out of Case Crime No. 0136 of 2019 under Sections 3/5/8 Cow Slaughter Act and 11 Cruelty of Animals Act, Police Station Jaitpura, District Varanasi, should be quashed under Section 482 CrPC. +1 more

Court's answer

All submissions made at the bar relate to disputed questions of fact which cannot be adjudicated by the High Court under Section 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 R.P. Kapur, Bhajan Lal, P.P. Sharma and Zandu Pharmaceutical.

Ratio / Principle

On a perusal of the material on record and the facts of the case, it cannot be said at this stage that the offences levelled against the applicants are not made out; the prayer to quash the chargesheet and proceedings is refused.

Key takeaways

If the applicants surrender before the court below and apply for bail within thirty days, the bail application shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law.ratio¶¶10
For a period of thirty days from the date of the order, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.ratio¶¶10
No further time beyond thirty days shall be allowed to the applicants to surrender before the court concerned.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Section 482 CrPC — quashing of chargesheet — Application to quash chargesheet and entire proceedings in Case No. 3735 of 2018 (Case Crime No. 0136 of 2019) under Sections 3/5/8 Cow Slaughter Act and 11 Cruelty of Animals Act, P.S. Jaitpura, District Varanasi — submissions raised disputed questions of fact not adjudicable under Section 482 Cr.P.C.; only a prima facie case to be seen in light of R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab (AIR 1960 SC 866), State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992 SCC (Cr.) 426), State of Bihar v. P.P. Sharma (1992 SCC (Cr.) 192) and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Mohd. Saraful Haq (2005 SCC (Cr.) 283) — on record, offences not said to be not made out; quashing prayer refused — applicants permitted to surrender and apply for bail within thirty days, no coercive action for thirty days, no further time for surrender — application disposed of. (Om Prakash-VII, J.; order dated 20.2.2020.)

Court No. - 78 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3233 of 2020 Applicant :- Sonu @ Mohammad Shamsher And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kishore Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed with the prayer to quash the chargesheet as well as the entire proceedings in Case No. 3735 of 2018, arising out of Case Crime No. 0136 of 2019, under Sections 3/5/8 Cow Slaughter Act and 11 Cruelty of Animals Act, Police Station Jaitpura, District Varanasi pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi and further to stay further proceedings of the aforesaid case.

It is submitted by the learned counsel of the applicants that the FIR has been lodged on false grounds while the applicants have not committed any offence. The police has also submitted charge sheet on the basis of insufficient evidence against the applicants. Essential ingredients to constitute offence are lacking. The present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention. Learned counsel for the applicants pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer.

I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record carefully.

As is evident, all the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 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 Supreme Court in the 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 . From a perusal of the material available on record and keeping in view the facts of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that offences levelled against the applicants are not made out. Hence, prayer made in the application is refused.

In the last, learned counsel has urged that direction for expeditious disposal of bail application of the applicants be given.

Hence, it is observed that in case applicants surrender before the court below and apply for bail within thirty days from today, the same shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law. For a period of thirty days from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.

It is made clear that no further time shall be allowed to the applicants to surrender before the court concerned.

With the aforesaid observations, the application stands disposed of.

Order Date :- 20.2.2020/safi