Karuna Nand Bajpayee, J. - (1.) THIS application u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the proceedings of criminal case no. 2488 of 2009 (State of U.P. Vs. Mor Mukut and others) pending in the court of learned A.C.J.M., Hapur, district Ghaziabad, now district Hapur arising out of case crime no. 731 of 2009, under Section 147, 452, 323, 504, 506, 427 I.P.C., P.S. Hapur Nagar, district Ghaziabad. 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 of the accused and also the court's decision to proceed against him 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 the cases 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 (Cr.) 192 and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para -10) : 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 make the position of law in this regard clear.;