Dismissed

Abdul Kabeer Khan @ Abdul Kadeer Khan v. State of U.P. thr. Prin. Secy. (Home) Govt. of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC30 May 2022A482/3511/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the applicant's application under Section 482 CrPC seeking to quash criminal proceedings arising from a property and money dispute. The court held the matter required factual adjudication by the trial court, failed to show malafide intent, and denied the prayer, though offered bail consideration if the applicant surrendered within 30 days.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quash refused; bail application to be considered expeditiously if applicant surrenders within 30 days; no coercive action during that period.

Abdul Kabeer Khan @ Abdul Kadeer Khan Vs State… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3511 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Abdul Kabeer Khan @ Abdul Kadeer Khan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thr. Prin. Secy. (Home) Govt. Of U.P. And Anr.

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Swapnil Sinha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings including chargesheet and cognizance/summoning order dated 04.01.2021, passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Jhansi in Session Trial No. 13 of 2021 (State vs. Arshad @ Neelu & Ors), arising out of case crime no. 181 of 2019, under Sections 420, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(1) Da, Dha SC/ST Act, P.S. Kotwali, District Jhansi, pending in the Court of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Jhansi.

¶8

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the first information report of this case has been lodged making false and baseless allegations. The dispute between the parties is purely civil in nature and matter pertains to money transaction between the parties. It has also been submitted that out of the total disputed amount of Rs. 17,55,000/-, the applicant has already returned Rs. 5,50,000 to the complainant. Learned counsel has referred the contents of FIR and statements of witnesses and submitted that essentially matter in dispute is purely a civil transaction and that the first information report has been lodged making false and baseless allegations and that no prima facie case is made out against the applicant.

¶9

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and argued that applicant has been shown beneficiary of entire incident, wherein the complainant was cheated in the tune of Rs. 17,55,000/-. Referring to first information report and statement of witnesses, it is submitted that the plot in question was sold to the complainant by concealing material facts. Learned A.G.A. has referred the version of first information report and statements of witnesses and submitted that that a prima facie case is made out against the applicant.

¶10

The legal position on the issue of quashing of criminal proceedings is well-settled that the jurisdiction to quash a complaint, FIR or a charge-sheet should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases. However, where the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint and material on record even if taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused, the charge-sheet may be quashed in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. In well celebrated judgment reported in AIR 1992 SC 605 State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal , Supreme Court has carved out certain guidelines, wherein FIR or proceedings may be quashed but cautioned that the power to quash FIR or proceedings should be exercised sparingly and that too in the rarest of rare cases.

¶11

In the instant matter, the submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicants call for determination on questions of fact which may be adequately adjudicated upon only by the trial court and even the submissions made on points of law can also be more appropriately gone into only by the trial court. Adjudication of questions of facts and appreciation of evidence or examining the reliability and credibility of the version, does

¶12

not fall within the arena of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In view of the material on record it can also not be held that the impugned criminal proceeding are manifestly attended with mala fide and maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.

¶13

After considering arguments raised by the learned counsel for parties and perusing the impugned complaint and the materials in support of the same, this Court does not find it to be a case which can be determined or gone into in an application under Section 482 Cr.PC. This Court cannot hold a parallel trial in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No such ground appears to be available to the applicants, on the basis of which the impugned charge-sheet or proceedings can be quashed going by the settled law in 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 Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 .

¶14

Similarly so far as the impugned summoning order is concerned, perusal of material on record shows that the impugned order has been passed by applying due procedure and no substantial illegality, perversity or any other substantial error could be pointed out. It is well settled that the power under section 482 Cr.P.C has to be exercised by the High Court, inter alia, to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. Though the powers possessed by the High Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. are very wide but the very plenitude of the power requires great caution in its exercise. The inherent power can not be exercised to stifle a legitimate prosecution. Such powers have to be exercised only

¶15

to give effect to any order under Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of the process of any court and to secure the ends of justice. In the instant case no case for quashing of impugned order is made out.

¶16

Accordingly, the prayer as made above is refused.

¶17

However, keeping in view the facts of the matter, it is directed that in case, applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, his bail application shall be considered and decided expeditiously, in accordance with settled law. For a period of 30 days from today or till the applicant surrenders before the court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.

¶18

With the aforesaid observations, the instant application is disposed of finally.

¶19

Order Date :- 30.5.2022 A. Tripathi

¶20

Digitally signed by AKHILESH TRIPATHI Date: 2022.05.31 15:51:09 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Abdul Kabeer Khan @ Abdul Kadeer Khan v. State of U.P. thr. Prin. Secy. (Home) Govt. of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Kabeer Khan @ Abdul Kadeer Khan v. State of U.P. thr. Prin. Secy. (Home) Govt. of U.P. and Anr.

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

Dhananjay Saroj and 7 Others Vs State of U.P.and Another

Parvej Ahmad and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Malati Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bhola Nath Pandey Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Dinesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Ambuj Pandey and Another Vs State of U.P and Another