Held that prima facie offence is disclosed against the applicant based on FIR and investigation material; quashing petition dismissed. Applicant granted ten days to appear for bail without coercive action.
Prayer for quashing refused; applicant granted ten days to appear for bail without coercive action.
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. - 90
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 33650 of 2022
Applicant :- Rajaram Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 04.12.2020 and summoning order dated 04.08.2022 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1529 of 2022 (State Vs. Rajaram), arising out of Case Crime No. 98 of 2020, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Gursarai, District Jhansi, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Garautha, Jhansi.
As per the allegations made in the FIR and the statement recorded under Section 161 CrPC, it is alleged that on 21.07.2020 at about 7:00 PM, the applicant forcibly entered in the house of the first informant and started hurling abuses and on objection being raised by the first informant, the applicant assaulted him and left the place of incident by extending death threats to him and his family members.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive.
Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that allegations made in the FIR are false, cooked up and concocted made just with an intention to drag him in criminal court and as such, entire proceedings be quashed.
Per contra, learned AGA for the State has vehemently opposed the aforesaid prayer and has submitted that from perusal of the allegations made in the FIR and material collected during the course of investigation, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicant and as such, entire proceedings cannot be quashed.
Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and from perusal of the allegations made in the FIR and material collected during the course of investigation, prima facie offence is clearly disclosed against the applicant.
At this stage, disputed question of fact cannot be considered, therefore, in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283, the prayer for entire proceedings is refused.
However in case, the applicant appears/ surrenders before the court below within ten days from today and applies for bail, his bail application be considered and disposed of in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in (2021) 10 SCC 773, after hearing the parties.
For a period of ten days from today or till the date of appearance/ surrender of the applicant before the court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant.
With the aforesaid observations, this application under Section 482 CrPC is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 1.11.2022 Nadim
Digitally signed by NADIM ALAM Date: 2022.11.01 16:54:24 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the entire proceedings under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC be quashed under Section 482 CrPC.
Whether bail should be considered for the applicant if they surrender before the court below within ten days.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
R.P. Kapur Vs. State of PunjabReferred¶12
AIR 1960 SC 866 · Who else cites this
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan LalReferred¶12
1992 SCC (Cri.) 426 · Who else cites this
State of Bihar Vs. P.P. SharmaReferred¶12
1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 · Who else cites this
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and anotherReferred¶12
2005 SCC (Cri.) 283 · Who else cites this
Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and anotherReferred¶13
(2021) 10 SCC 773 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rajaram
State of U.P.
Rajiv Gupta
Nadim
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
