Gyan Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2020)

Gyan Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2020)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer to quash the charge sheet and proceedings refused; however, the applicants were directed that if they surrender before the court below and apply for bail within 45 days, the bail application shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law, and no coercive action shall be taken against them for 45 days, with no further time allowed for surrender.

Issue for consideration

Whether the charge sheet and proceedings of case crime no. 1110 of 2017 (State Vs. Lavkush and others), under Sections 354, 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 8 POCSO Act, pending before the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Chitrakoot, should be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. +1 more

Court's answer

On a perusal of the material on record and the facts of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that the offences levelled against the applicants are not made out.

Ratio / Principle

All submissions made at the bar relate to disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.; accordingly the prayer made in the application is refused.

Key takeaways

At this stage only a prima facie case is to be seen, in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in R.P. Kapur, Bhajan Lal, P.P. Sharma and Zandu Pharmaceutical.ratio¶9
If the applicants surrender before the court below and apply for bail within 45 days, the bail application shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law.ratio¶11
For a period of 45 days no coercive action shall be taken/given effect to against the applicants, and no further time will be allowed to them for surrender before the court concerned.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing application by Gyan Singh and another against the charge sheet and proceedings in case crime no. 1110 of 2017 (State Vs. Lavkush and others) under Sections 354, 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 8 POCSO Act, P.S. Karvi Kotwali Nagar, district Chitrakoot, pending before the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Chitrakoot. Held (Om Prakash-VII, J.): on the material on record it cannot be said at this stage that the offences are not made out; all submissions raised disputed questions of fact not adjudicable under Section 482 Cr.P.C.; taking only a prima facie view in the light of R.P. Kapur, Bhajan Lal, P.P. Sharma and Zandu Pharmaceutical, the prayer to quash was refused. On the applicants' request, it was directed that if they surrender before the court below and apply for bail within 45 days, the bail application shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law; no coercive action shall be taken against them for 45 days, and no further time will be allowed for surrender. Application disposed of (Order Date: 23.1.2020).

Court No. - 78

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 591 of 2020

Applicant :- Gyan Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dev Prakash Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned AGA appearing for the State.

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the prayer to quash the charge sheet as well as proceedings of case crime no. 1110 of 2017 (State Vs. Lavkush and others), under Sections 354, 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 8 POCSO Act, Police Station Karvi Kotwali Nagar, district Chitrakoot pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Chitrakoot. Further prayer has been made to stay the proceedings of the aforesaid case.

Submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that there was dispute between the parties regarding the land for which registered Will Deed was executed in favour of the applicant no. 1 Gyan Singh by Dharampal. It is also argued that applicant no. 1 sown crop over the disputed property. Since opposite party no. 2 and others damaged the crop, one N.C.R. was lodged. Thereafter the present FIR was lodged with malafide intention. It is also argued that another FIR has also been lodged by the applicant side in which also charge sheet has been submitted. Continuation of the proceedings of the aforesaid case is abuse of of process of law and case of the applicants is covered with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal reported in 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer.

From a perusal of the material available on record and keeping in view of the facts of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that offences levelled against the applicants are not made out. 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 the Hon'ble 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. The prayer made in the application is refused.

At this stage, learned counsel for the applicants prays that a direction may be issued to the Court below for expeditious disposal of the bail application of the applicants.

Hence it is directed that in case the applicants surrender before the court below and applies for bail within 45 days from today the same shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law. For a period of 45 days from today, no coercive action shall be taken/given effect to against the applicants. It is made clear that no further time will be allowed to the applicants for surrender before the court concerned.

With the above observations, the application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 23.1.2020

Sachdeva