Karuna Nand Bajpayee, J. - (1.) THE application u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by applicants Meva Lal and Ram Dulari for quashing the charge sheet dated 29.06.2013 submitted in Case Crime No. 1290 of 2013 (State v. Vipin and others) arising out of in Case Crime No. 280 of 2013 u/s. 498A, 323, 324, 506 I.P.C. & 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station -Akbarpur, District Kanpur Dehat pending in the Court of C.J.M., Kanpur Dehat. Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
(2.) THE submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants involve several intricate factual details and many disputed questions of fact related to the case. False implication due to malafide intention has been pleaded. The law regarding the sufficiency of the material which may justify the summoning and the court's decision to proceed against the accused in a given case is well settled. The court has to eschew itself from embarking upon a roving enquiry into the last details of the case. It is also not advisable to adjudge whether the case shall ultimately end in conviction or not. Only a prima facie satisfaction of the court about the existence of sufficient ground to proceed in the matter is required.
(3.) THE quashing of the charge sheet or the proceeding consequent thereupon may be done only if the F.I.R. and the evidence or material collected by the Investigating Officer does not disclose any offence or if there is any legal bar which prohibits the proceedings on its basis. The Apex Court decisions in R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab : AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal : 1992 SCC(Cr.) 426, State of Bihar v. P.P. Sharma : 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para -10) : 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 make the position of law in this regard clear.;