RAJESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
LAWS(ALL)-2012-1-836
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on January 16,2012

RAJESH KUMAR Appellant
VERSUS
State of U.P. and another Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Rajesh Dayal Khare, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sandeep Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the State. On the request of learned counsel for the applicant, another Bench of this Court, vide order dated 16.3.2011, had referred the matter to mediation centre. The Incharge mediation centre vide its report dated 7.9.2011 had reported that mediation has failed between the parties, copy of which report is on record.
(2.) THE present 482 Cr.P.C. petition has been filed for quashing the proceedings of criminal complaint case no. 855 of 2010 under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act Police Station Khekra District Baghpat, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate Baghpat, District Baghpat. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. He further contends that the applicant has already been enlarged on bail.
(3.) FROM the perusal of the 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 applicant. All the submission 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 applicant has got a right of discharge under Section 239 or 227/228, or 245 Cr.P.C. as the case may be through a proper application for the said purpose and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.