Dismissed

Raghuvar Das and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2024A482/22186/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicants alleged to have damaged temple idols sought quashing of complaint proceedings under Sections 295-A, 504, 506 IPC via Section 482 Cr.P.C. Court held factual adjudication lies with trial court, refused quashing, directed discharge application consideration within three weeks with interim no-coercive-action protection.

What the court decided

AI extract

Raghuvar Das and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:189159

¶2

Court No. - 75

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22186 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Raghuvar Das And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Divyanshu Pathak,Manoj Mishra 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 preferred for quashing of the entire proceedings, including summoning order dated 24.08.2023, of Complaint Case No. 4759 of 2023, under Sections - 295-A, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station - Kagroul, District - Agra, pending in the court of Additional Civil Judge (J.D.), Court No.4/F.T.C.-1 (Criminal) Agra.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that impugned complaint has been lodged making false and baseless allegations. Applicant no.1 Raghuvar Das is priest of the temple and applicant no.2 Somendra is his Assistant and the allegation that applicants have damaged the temple or idols is wholly false. In fact, construction work was being made in temple with co-operation of villagers. The police report submitted on application under Section - 156 (3) Cr.P.C., was referred, wherein police have stated that construction was being made in temple with cooperation of villagers. It is further submitted that no offence under Section - 506 I.P.C. is made out against applicants. In this connection, learned counsel has referred case of Parminder Kaur Alias P.P. Kaur Alias Soni vs. State of Punjab (2020) 8 Supreme Court Cases 811.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that the complainant has made clear allegations that both the applicants have damaged the temple and

¶10

idols of god and when the complainant has objected, the applicants have threatened to kill him. The statement of complainant recorded under Section - 200 Cr.P.C. is supported by two witnesses examined under Section - 202 Cr.P.C.. It was submitted that a prima facie case is made out against applicants.

¶11

I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record.

¶12

The legal position on the issue of quashing of criminal proceedings is wellsettled 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 case, perusal of record shows that complainant has made allegation in the complaint that there is old temple in his village, where some idol of deities are established. On 11.04.2023 at 10:00 A.M. when complainant went to temple for offering prayer, he saw that applicants along with some miscreants were damaging the idols and temple and when the complainant objected, they have abused and threatened to kill him. The complainant has supported said version in his statement under Section - 200 Cr.P.C. The witnesses examined under Section - 202 Cr.P.C. have also supported the said version. 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

¶14

jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶15

After considering arguments raised by 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. Accordingly the prayer for quashing the impugned complaint and summoning order is hereby refused.

¶16

However, it is directed that in case applicants move an application for discharge within a period of three weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law. For a period of three weeks from today and in case, such an application is moved within the aforesaid period, till the disposal of such application, no coercive action shall be taken against applicant, provided applicants co-operate in early disposal of the discharge application.

¶17

The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of in above terms.

¶18

Order Date :- 3.12.2024 S Rawat

¶19

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

Raghuvar Das and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Raghuvar Das and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases