Jitendra Kumar Agrawal and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 91 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29983 of 2023 Applicant :- Jitendra Kumar Agrawal And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Suchita Mehrotra,Kartikeya Saran Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Gajendra Kumar,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for applicants and the learned A.G.A. for State.

¶2This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants to quash the entire proceedings of S.T. No.05 of 2021, under Section 18/27(a), 28, 28(a) Drugs and Cosmetics Act, P.S. Kasganj Kotwali, District Kasganj.

¶3At the very outset, learned counsel for applicants submits that as per material on record, no offence under the charging sections is made out against applicants. As such impugned charge-sheet as well as entire proceedings of aforesaid case are liable to be quashed by this Court.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that only applicant has been implicated as an accused but the firm has not been implicated as an accused. Further submission is that no proper sanction has been obtained to launch the prosecution. As the period of 28 days is prescribed for the application for retesting by CDL and the application was moved just after the receipt of the intimation but as per the report, the sample was presented for retesting after self life. Thus, the valuable right, which is given to the applicant has not been availed and he has been deprived of the same for no fault of his own. Further submission is that the discharge application is still pending.

¶5Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the FIR and the material collected during the course of investigation, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicants and as such, entire proceedings cannot be quashed.

¶6From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. All the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question 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 a right of discharge under Section 239, 245(2) or 227/228 Cr.P.C. as the case may be, before the court below and they are free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the trial court.

¶7The prayer for quashing the proceedings of case as well as charge sheet is refused.

¶8At this stage, learned counsel for the applicants submit that applicants may be permitted to move discharge application before the court concerned.

¶9Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that the applicants will move a proper application for discharge through counsel within thirty days from today and they are free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court, which shall be considered and disposed of by the Trial Court in accordance with law within a period of two months.

¶10Accordingly, the present application is disposed of. Order Date :- 27.10.2023 Sanjeet High Court of Judicature at Allahabad