This court dismissed the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of criminal proceedings. The court held that disputed facts cannot be adjudicated at this stage and ordered an expedited decision on a subsequent bail application.
Application for quashing dismissed; bail application to be expedited if filed.
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. - 84
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3621 of 2022
Applicant :- Radhey Chaubey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
The applicants through this application under section 482 Cr.P.C. have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings of the Case No.1644 of 2019 (State Vs. Radhey Chaubey & others), pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Chakia, Chandauli, including charge sheet dated 22.07.2019 and cognizance order dated 31.08.2019 arising out of Case Crime No.0060 of 2019, under Sections 323, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Iliya, district Chandauli.
The contention of the counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated by the opposite party no.2 as no such occurrence had taken place and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has submitted that from the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that prima facie no offence is made out against the applicant.
At this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. 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 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 . The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicants have got right of discharge under Sections 239 or 227/228 and 245 Cr.P.C. as the case may be through a proper application a proper application for the said purpose raising all the grounds/grievances which have been taken in this application or which may have been taken for the said purpose and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.
After having very carefully examined, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material brought on record, this Court find that there is no justification for quashing the entire proceedings of the aforementioned case.
The application lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.
However, it is directed that if the applicant apply for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in view of the settled law laid by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 5191 of 2021 .
Order Date :- 17.2.2022 R./
Digitally signed by RAJEEV KUMAR SACHDEVA Date: 2022.02.21 12:20:41 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether Section 482 Cr.P.C. jurisdiction warrants quashing of criminal proceedings initiated under Sections 323, 452, 504, 506 IPC against the applicant.
Whether disputed questions of fact can be adjudicated at the stage of quashing application under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Whether bail prayer should be expedited pending the final outcome of the quashing application.
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 (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 · Who else cites this
Satendra Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of InvestigationReferred¶12
Satendra Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 5191 of 2021
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Radhey Chaubey
State Of U.P
Another
Ajit Singh
Rajeev Kumar Sachdeva
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
