KARUNA NAND BAJPAYEE,J. - (1.) This application under section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 has been filed seeking the quashing of the proceedings of Case Crime No. 212 of 2017, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 120B I.P.C., P.S.-Balrai, District-Etawah including the charge sheet dated 30.11.2017 submitted in the aforesaid case. Heard Sri Atharv Dixit, Advocate holding brief of the applicants counsel and learned AGA. Entire record has been perused. All the contentions raised by the applicants counsel relate to disputed questions of fact. The court has also been called upon to adjudge the testimonial worth of prosecution evidence and evaluate the same on the basis of various intricacies of factual details which have been touched upon by the learned counsel. The veracity and credibility of material furnished on behalf of the prosecution has been questioned and false implication has been pleaded.
(2.) The law regarding sufficiency of material which may justify the summoning of 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 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.) Through a catena of decisions given by Hon'ble Apex Court this legal aspect has been expatiated upon at length and the law that has evolved over a period of several decades is too well settled. The cases of (1) Chandra Deo Singh v. Prokash Chandra Bose AIR (1963) SC 1430 , (2) Vadilal Panchal v. Dattatraya Dulaji Ghadigaonker, AIR (1960) SC 1113 and (3) Smt. Nagawwa v. Veeranna Shivalingappa Konjalgi, (1976) 3 SCC 736 may be usefully referred to in this regard.;