Mohammad Mairaz and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home and Others

Court No. - 15 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10040 of 2023 Applicant :- Mohammad Mairaz And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Yogeshwar Sharan Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J. Heard Sri Yogeshwar Sharan Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant application has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 30.7.2023, impugned summoning order dated 4.9.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Gonda arising out of F.I.R. No./Case Crime No. 189/2023, under Sections 147,385,353,332,504, 506 I.P.C., Section 3(1)(Da)/(Dha) of SC/ST Act and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Chhapia, District Gonda and the partial proceedings arising out from session case no. 1230 of 2023. All the contentions raised by the applicants' counsel relate to disputed questions of fact. The court has also been called upon to adjudge the testimonial worth of prosecution evidence and evaluate the same on the basis of various intricacies of factual details which have been touched upon by learned counsel. The veracity and credibility of material furnished on behalf of the prosecution has been questioned and false implication has been pleaded. In the process of invoking its inherent jurisdiction, this court cannot be persuaded to have a pre trial before the actual trial begins. The submissions made by the learned counsel call for adjudication on pure questions of fact which may be adequately adjudicated upon only by the trial court and while doing so even the submissions made on points of law can also be more appropriately gone into by the trial court in this case. The quashing of the charge sheet and the entire proceedings can also be done only if it does not disclose any offence or if there is any legal bar which prohibits the proceedings on its basis. The Apex Court decisions in the case of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 SCC(Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and also in Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283 make the position of law in this regard clear. In the absence of any of the grounds recognized by the Apex Court which might justify the quashing of charge sheet or the impugned proceedings, the prayer for quashing the same is refused as I do not see any abuse of the courts process either. The court below has been vested with sufficient powers to discharge the accused even before the stage to frame the charges comes, if for reasons to be recorded it considers the charge to be groundless. As requested, the permission to appear through counsel before the concerned lower court within a period of three weeks from today and move an application claiming discharge on behalf of whom this application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved, is granted. The concerned court shall after hearing the counsel decide the application on merits in accordance with law within a period which shall not exceed a period of two months from today. With the above observations, this application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 13.10.2023 Shravan High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench