Dismissed

Ramveer Sharma and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC13 May 2022A482/10898/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this quashing application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court rejected the argument that a false implication and civil financial dispute warranted quashing. The court held that forged signature allegations pointed to a cognizable offence and disputed facts of forgery could not be adjudicated at this stage.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; quashing of proceedings refused; stay of proceedings dismissed.

Ramveer Sharma and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 42

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10898 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ramveer Sharma And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Pankaj Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been moved with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.7950 of 2020 and Criminal Case No.43000 of 2020 arising out of Case Crime No. 333 of 2019, under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 411, 120-B, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Hariparvat, District Agra as well as cognizance orders dated 31.01.2020 and 24.11.2020 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra and also a prayer is made to stay the proceedings in this case till the disposal of this application.

¶7

It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that the accused-applicant have been falsely implicated by the opposite party no. 2 and no such occurrence has taken place. He further contends that from a perusal of the FIR and evidence collected by the Investigating Officer, no case is made out under the alleged sections and the cognizance taken by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra is perverse and illegal. He further contends that the allegation made in the FIR pertains to financial dispute between the partners and the same is purely civil in nature between them. If proceedings are allowed to continue that would amount to an abuse of process of court, therefore, charge-sheet needs to be quashed. He has placed reliance upon the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Indian Oil Corporation vs. NEPC India Ltd. and others (2006) 6 SCC 736 .

¶8

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

¶9

After investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted by the Investigating Officer after having recorded statements of witnesses.The veracity of the statement of the witnesses cannot be tested in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. From the evidence on record, it cannot be said that cognizable offence is not made out against the accused-applicant.

¶10

Upon perusal of record and upon hearing of learned counsel for the applicants, it is clear that the applicants have withdrawn money from complainant's firm by making forged signature of the complainant. The dispute pertains to fact which cannot be adjudicated by this Court in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. Hon'ble Apex Court in various case has laid-down law that under section 482 Cr.P.C., the Court should refrain from interfering in disputed question of fact. The facts of the case of Indian Oil Corporation (Supra) are entirely different from the facts of the present case, hence I do not find any infirmity in the impugned orders.

¶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 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, AIR 1992 SC 604 and 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.

¶12

The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case is refused and the instant application is dismissed.

¶13

Order Date :- 13.5.2022 AU

¶14

Digitally signed by ADEEB UDDIN Date: 2022.05.16 15:50:28 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ramveer Sharma and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramveer Sharma and Another v. State of U.P. 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

Sonu @ Devkinandan Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Murali Dhar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rameshwar Dayal Vs State of U.P and Another

Dharmdev Yadav and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Tariq @ Babli and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sunil @ Sunil Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another