Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 824 (ALL)

Kalam v. State of U. P.

2016-03-04

PANKAJ NAQVI

body2016
JUDGMENT Pankaj Naqvi,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the Charge sheet no.22 of 2014 dated 20.3.2014 arising out of Criminal Case No.1253 of 2015 (Case Crime No.44 of 2014), under Sections 3/8 of the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act and 11(3) E Prevention of Animal Cruelty Act IPC, P.S.- Bidhuna, District Auraiya pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Auraiya District Auraiya. 3. The contention of the counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants are 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. 4. From the perusal of the materials 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 applicants. 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. 5. The payer claimed is refused. The application is dismissed.