Dismissed

Chhotak @ Susheel @ Sunil v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC10 Feb 2020A482/3819/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of a charge sheet and bail warrants in an SC/ST act case with IPC charges, holding that alleged innocence requires investigation and disputed facts cannot be decided at this stage.

What did the court decide?

Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing charge sheet, cognizance order, N.B.W. and entire proceedings was dismissed.

Chhotak @ Susheel @ Sunil Vs State of Up and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3819 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Chhotak @ Susheel @ Sunil Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Singh,Roopesh Kumar Mishra

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge sheet no.210 of 2019 dated 27.05.2019 and cognizance order dated 25.07.2019 as well as order dated 16.11.2019, issuing N.B.W. against the applicant along with entire proceeding of Special Trial No.73 of 2019 (State Vs. Chhotak @ Susheel) under Sections 354, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(2)(5A) of S.C./S.T. Act, 1989, P.S. Robertsganj, District Sonebhadra, arising out of Case Crime No.275 of 2019 pending in the court of Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Sonebhadra.

¶8

Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant has been falsely implicated in the F.I.R. lodged by opposite party no.2 on 14.05.2019; that applicant is a young boy of just 19 years while opposite party no.2 is a lady aged about 29-30 years old; that it is wrong to say that applicant approached opposite party no.2 at her home and upon tendering a sum of Rs.500/- asked for sexual favour and upon her protest he thrown her on ground and upon alarm raised by her, he fled away; that entire prosecution story is absolutely false and incorrect and I.O. has submitted charge sheet without proper investigation; that applicant has not committed any offence and he is innocent and no offence is made out against him.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of applicant.

¶10

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 applicant. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which require evidence and 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

¶11

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, and the applicant has failed to prove any prima facie case.

¶12

In view of discussions made above, I have come to the conclusion that learned counsel for the applicant has failed to show that there is any abuse of process of court or likelihood of miscarriage of justice for prevention of which the exercise of inherent powers by this Court is required. The application is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.

¶13

The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly dismissed.

¶14

However, if the applicant appears before the court below and moves application for bail, the same shall be disposed of expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶15

Order Date :- 10.2.2020 Md Faisal

Chhotak @ Susheel @ Sunil v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chhotak @ Susheel @ Sunil v. State of Up and Another

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

Bheem Singh Vs State of U.P.

Gaurav Vs State of U.P.

Bhupendra Singh @ Bhupendra Vs State of U.P.

Ramesh Yadav and 2 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Neeraj and 3 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Rahul and 3 Others Vs State of Up and Another