Dismissed

Zahid and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC29 Aug 2024A482/20538/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of criminal proceedings for alleged robbery and assault, the High Court held that the matter involves questions of fact and credibility unsuitable for determination in summary proceedings and dismissed the application.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. dismissed; criminal proceedings and impugned orders upheld.

Zahid and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:138772

¶2

Court No. - 76

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20538 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Zahid And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Singh,Uday Bhan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings, including summoning order dated 05.07.2023 as well as order dated 31.10.2023, of Special Case No. 12 of 2023 (Smt. Shabnam vs. Inam and Others), under Sections - 323, 392 I.P.C., Police Station- Kotwali, District- Etawah, pending in the court of learned Special Judge (D.A.A. Act), Etawah.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for applicants that applicants are innocent and no prima facie case is made out against them. The opposite party no.2 has filed the impugned complaint against applicants making false and baseless allegations. It was stated that in fact the complainant has taken some money from the applicants and when the said amount was demanded, she has lodged false complaint. The allegation of robbery of golden chain and ring is wholly false and improbable. Both the parties are related to each other and that the complaint has been filed in order to exert undue pressure upon the applicants. The trial court has not considered the matter in correct perspective and applicants were summoned in an arbitrary manner. Learned counsel has referred contents of complaint and statement of witnesses recorded under Section –

¶9

200 and 202 Cr.P.C. and submitted that no case is made out against applicants.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that in view of allegations made in the complaint and statements of witnesses, recorded during inquiry under Section – 202 Cr.P.C., a prima facie case is made out against applicants and there is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order.

¶11

I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record.

¶12

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.

¶13

In the instant matter, the opposite party no.2/complainant has lodged the complaint against applicants alleging that on 21.12.2022 at 11:00 A.M. applicants trespassed into her house and they have assaulted her with leg and fists and at the point of knife they have forcibly snatched her ear rings and chain and resultantly she has sustained injures. The informant has supported said version in her statement recorded under Section

¶14

– 200 Cr.P.C. The witnesses examined under Section – 202 Cr.P.C. have also supported the said version. The version of complainant is supported by her medical examination report, wherein six injuries have been shown on her person. The trial court has summoned the applicants by a reasoned order by considering all relevant facts. It may also be observed that the charges have already been framed against applicants but the order of charge has not been challenged.

¶15

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 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.

¶16

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.P.C. This Court cannot hold a parallel trial in an application under Section - 482 Cr.P.C. 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

¶17

requires great caution in its exercise. The inherent power cannot be exercised to stifle a legitimate prosecution. Such powers have to be exercised only 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.

¶18

Considering all attending facts of the matter, no case for quashing of impugned order/proceedings is made out. The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. lacks merit and thus, liable to be dismissed.

¶19

The instant application under Section - 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed .

¶20

Order Date :- 29.8.2024 S Rawat

¶21

Digitally signed by :- SHOBHIT RAWAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Zahid and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Zahid and 3 Others 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

Vikas Goel vs State of U.P. and Another

Muntzir vs State of U.P. and Another

Rakesh Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Shamim Haider and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Salman and 6 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Ankur Goyal and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another