Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 111866 (ALL)

PUSHPA AND 2 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

A482/43580/2024 · 2025-05-29

Deepak Verma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:93310 Court No. - 84 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 43580 of 2024 Applicant :- Pushpa And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kanhaiya Lal Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State. 2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the Charge sheet dated 07.11.2022, Summoning Order as well as cognizance Order dated 21.01.2023, Criminal Case No.864 of 2023 (State Vs. Pushpa & others) arising out of Case Crime No.126 of 2022, U/s 147, 323, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C. Police Station- Chhawani, District-Basti, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Second, Court No.10, Basti. 3. As per contents of FIR, applicants assaulted the informant and his family members on 12.05.2022 as well as on the very next date, i.e., on 13.05.2022 applicant No.3 along with 15-20 persons again brutally assaulted the informant with lathi and danda, due to which, informant fainted on the spot and sustained grievous injuries. 4. Counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case due to mala fide intention. Injury sustained by injured are simple in nature. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the submission raised by applicants' counsel and submits that looking to the serious injuries sustained by injured, prima facie offence is made out against the applicants. Statement of witness recorded during investigation are supporting the prosecution story. hence, applicants are not entitled for relief as prayed. No interference is warranted. 6. The grounds taken in the application reveal that many of them relate to disputed question of fact. This Court is of the view that it is well settled that the appreciation of evidence is a function of the trial court. This Court in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot assume such jurisdiction and put an end to the process of trial provided under the law. It is also settled by the Apex Court in catena of judgments that The impugned criminal proceeding against the applicants is abuse of the process of the Court and is liable to be quashed by this Court.the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. at pre-trial stage should not be used in a routine manner but it has to be used sparingly, only in such an appropriate cases, where it manifestly appears that there is a legal bar against the institution or continuance of the criminal proceedings or where allegations made in First Information Report or charge-sheet and the materials relied in support of same, on taking their face value and accepting in their entirety do not disclose the commission of any offence against the accused. The disputed questions of facts and defence of the accused cannot be taken into consideration at this pre-trial stage. 7. In view of the above, in the light of judgment of the Apex Court in the matters of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, Manik B. Vs. Kadapala Sreyes Reddy and another, 2023 Live Law (SC) 642, 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, no ground for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case, is made out which may call for any interference by this Court in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as the same do not suffer from any illegality or infirmity. 8. The present 482 application of applicants-Pushpa, Shalu and Amrendra Tiwari @ Aman, is hereby dismissed with the aforesaid observation. 9. However, if the applicants surrender before the concerned court within three weeks from today and apply for bail, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the court concerned, in accordance with law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922. 10. For the period of three weeks from today or till the time of surrender of the applicants before the Court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against them. Order Date :- 30.5.2025 Nitin Verma Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad