Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings rejected. Court held that factual allegations require evidence and trial, so no quarrel about evidence at this stage. Application disposed of without opinion on merits.
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. - 82
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4660 of 2022
Applicant :- Umashankar And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Durga Prasad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. appearing for State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash entire proceeding of Case No. 113 of 2021 (State Versus Umashankar and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 392 of 202019, under Sections 147, 148, 308, 323 and 504 I.P.C., P.S.-Sumerpur, District-Hamirpur, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hamirpur.
From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that prima facie offences are made out against the applicants. All the submissions made at the Bar relate to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Time and again it has been highlighted by Supreme Court that at the stage of charge sheet factual query and assessment of defence evidence is beyond purview of scrutiny under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The allegations being factual in nature can be decided only subject to evidence. In view of settled legal proposition, no findings can be recorded about veracity of allegations at this juncture in absence of evidence. Apex Court has highlighted that jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. be sparingly/rarely invoked with complete circumspection and
caution. Very recently in Criminal Appeal No.675 of 2019 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No.1151 of 2018) (Md. Allauddin Khan Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) decided on 15th April, 2019 , Supreme Court observed as to what should be examined by High Court in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and in paras 15, 16 and 17 said as under :
" 15. The High Court should have seen that when a specific grievance of the appellant in his complaint was that respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have committed the offences punishable under Sections 323, 379 read with Section 34 IPC, then the question to be examined is as to whether there are allegations of commission of these two offences in the complaint or not. In other words, in order to see whether any prima facie case against the accused for taking its cognizable is made out or not, the Court is only required to see the allegations made in the complaint. In the absence of any finding recorded by the High Court on this material question, the impugned order is legally unsustainable.
Recently, above view has been reiterated by Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No. 175 of 2020 (State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Yogendra Singh Jadon and Another) decided on 31.01.2020 .
No material irregularity in the procedure followed by Court below has been pointed out. It is not a case of grave injustice justifying interference in this application at this stage.
In view thereof, I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the proceeding of aforesaid case.
Needless to state that in the eventuality of filing any bail application by the applicants before the trial Court, it is expected from the trial Court to decide the same expeditiously in accordance with law after, considering entire aspect of the matter.
However, it is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the competent Court below is to act, in accordance with law.
With the above observation, this application stands disposed of .
Order Date :- 20.4.2022
MN/-
Digitally signed by MAHENDRA NATH Date: 2022.04.23 16:13:29 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can quash criminal proceedings at this stage where allegations are factual in nature.
是否存在本法院可以在没有证据的情况下对指控的可信度做出发现。
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Yogendra Singh Jadon and AnotherReferred¶13
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Umashankar And 4 Others
State of U.P. and Another
Umesh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
