The High Court dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of criminal proceedings. The Court held that the disputes regarding the FIR and investigation were factual issues requiring trial, no prima facie case was established, and thus there was no abuse of process or likelihood of miscarriage of justice.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 79
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7066 of 2020
Applicant :- Nisar And Anr Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pramod Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Heard Sri Pramod Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings as well as charge sheet dated 05.03.2019 (cognizance dated 29.06.2019) in Case No. 4423 of 2019 (State Versus Nisar and others), under Sections 452, 323, 325, 308, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Sikandrabad, District Bulandshahar (arising out of Case Crime No. 910 of 2018), pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahar.
Learned counsel for the applicants contends that applicants have been falsely implicated in highly belated FIR lodged by the opposite party no.2 after seven days of the incident, as a counterblast to the FIR lodged by Gulsan, mother of the applicants; that Investigating Officer have submitted charge sheet without fair and proper investigation of the case and learned Trial Court has taken cognizance without due application of mind.
Per contra, learned A.G.A supported the cognizance order and contended that in the incident in question as many as seven injuries were caused to Sabu on head as well as fracture of Alana bone; that correctness of the version and counter version in the FIR lodged by the mother of the applicant as well as FIR lodged by the opposite party no.2 are subject matter of evidence to be adduced before the learned Trial Court and may not be corrected at this stage, whereas, there is no reason to prove the FIR lodged by the mother of applicant to be corrected at this stage.
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 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.
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.
The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 20.2.2020 T.S.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the inherent powers of the Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be exercised to quash criminal proceedings.
Whether a prima facie case for the offences alleged is established based on the material on record.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
R.P. Kapur Vs. State of PunjabReferred¶9
R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866 · Who else cites this
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan LalReferred¶9
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426 · Who else cites this
State of Bihar Vs. P.P.SharmaReferred¶9
State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 · Who else cites this
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful HaqReferred¶9
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Nisar And Anr
State of U.P. and Another
Harsh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
