Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1590 (ALL)

Arjun Kumar Sinha v. State of U. P.

2016-04-27

RAMESH SINHA, VINOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA-III

body2016
JUDGMENT Heard Sri Vikrant Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Nitin Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 16.1.2014 and order of taking cognizance on it dated 30.9.2015 of Special S.T. No.102 of 2015, case crime no.71 of 2013, u/s 419, 420, 466, 467 IPC and Section 13(d) Prevention of Corruption Act, P.S. Kotwali, district Rampur. 3. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is 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. So far as applicant is concerned, he was the member of the Committee which was constituted for selection of the driver in Nagar Palika Parishad, Rampur and the then Chairman and Executive Officer were responsible for any financial irregularity for the said selection process. He has drawn attention of the Court towards letter dated 12.1.2012 of the Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Rampur wherein it has been stated that any financial irregularity which was done was committed by the then Chairman of the Nagar Palika Parishad. 4. Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing and submitted that the co-accused Nabijan Qureshi, the then Executive Officer earlier approached this Court challenging the charge sheet by filing 482 Cr.P.C. Application No.7443 of 2016, which was rejected by another Bench of this Court on 9.3.2016. 5. 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 relate to the disputed questions 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. 6. 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. 6. The prayer for quashing the charge sheet as well as cognizance order passed in the aforesaid case is refused. 7. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.