Virendra Vikram Singh, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA. By moving the present application under section 482 Cr.P.C., charge sheet No. 75 of 2013 and proceedings of Case No. 3984 of 2013, arising out of Case Crime No. 76 of 2013, under Sections 457, 380, 411 IPC, P.S. Kotwali, District Gorakhpur, have been prayed to be quashed.
(2.) IT is not disputed that the civil dispute between the parties about the vacation of the house in question is pending. Applicant No. 1 is the son of the landlord and others are close relative of the landlord. 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 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 v. State of Punjab, : A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, : 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar v. P.P. Sharma, : 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. 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 before the trial Court through a proper application for the said purpose and he is free to take all the submission in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.
(3.) NO case for quashing the charge -sheet and proceedings is made out and as such the prayer is declined.;