Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 1165 (ALL)

Akhilesh Pal v. State of U. P.

2023-04-27

UMESH CHANDRA SHARMA

body2023
JUDGMENT : Umesh Chandra Sharma, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Pankaj Kumar Tripathi, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 2. This application has been moved under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 31/2020 pending before learned Special Judge POCSO Act, Azamgarh, District Azamgarh as (State Vs. Kamlesh) arising out from Case Crime No. 102 of 2019 registered under Sections 363, 366, 376 of I.P.C and 3/4 of POCSO Act at Police Station Sidhari, District Azamgarh with regard to the applicants only. 3. In brief, facts of the case are that informant Subedar Yadav, lodged an F.I.R on 18.04.2019, regarding the incident dated 14.04.2019, under crime no. 102 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C, in which later on charge sheet has also been submitted under Section 376 I.P.C. The facts of the case are that on 14.09.2019 Kamlesh Pal S/o Jaggu Pal was talking to his minor daughter aged about 16 years privately, when his brother Hawaldar Yadav reached there and reprimanded both of them and chased them away and said never to meet again. In the same night about 09:00 p.m. accused Kamlesh Pal was seen by his son Rajesh Yadav walking with his brother Akhilesh Pal and Deepak Pal (applicants) in the street next to his house. In the same night his daughter had been abducted on the pretext of marriage by all the accused persons, when Akhilesh Pal provided mobile number of accused Kamlesh Pal, when he contacted on the given number, it was switched off. He tried to find a lot from his level, when he could find, he went to the Police Station and lodged the F.I.R. 4. During the course of investigation the victim was recovered and accused Kamlesh Pal was arrested and the statement of the victim had been recorded. The victim in her statement under section 161 Cr.P.C has deposed that on 14.04.2019, she left her village by her own freewill, she called Kamlesh Pal at 10:00 p.m when her parents fell as sleep, they went to the Railway station together on her own freewill. From there they both went to Ludhiyan by train. There they both got married in the Tample and started living as husband and wife. From there they both went to Ludhiyan by train. There they both got married in the Tample and started living as husband and wife. Kamlesh started working in the same steel company, they both were living happlily Kamlesh used to talk on his home by phone. One day he came to know that his mother’s helth was bad, then both of them were coming back to meet her mother secretly on 18.Jan, 2020, seeing the Police at Narauli Inter Section, Kamlesh moved away and the police brought her to the Police Station. She wants to live with Kamlesh Pal. 5. The victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C has stated that she was about 18 years old less than 2-3 months. On 14.04.2019, she had gone with Kamlesh of her own free will to Ludhiyana. They both knew each other for two three years, they used to like each other, she went with him on her own free will, he did not lure her, they both got married and were living like husband and wife. She has to live with Kamlesh 6. From the above statement it is crystal clear that the applicant had not played role in the commission of any crime. There is no iota of evidence that the applicants were knowing the plan of the victim and accused Kamlesh Pal. It could not be established that they both were facilitated by the applicants or they ever visited the place where they both were living before the recovery of the victim. It could not be established that the applicants were knowing the whereabouts of the victim and accused Kamlesh Pal, at Ludhiya. There is no evidence that any amount for their livelihood had been provided by the applicant during the relevant period. From the evidence on record it transpires that, it is a matter of love affair between the a boy and a girl. There is no evidence that the applicant abetted or conspired in any way for the commission of the alleged crime. Even then a chargesheet had been submitted against them under the aforesaid Sections. 7. This court is of the considered view that no case is made out against the applicants on the basis of evidence available on record. Section 482 Cr.P.C has been incorporated to prevent the abuse of the process of the Court and to secure the ends of justice. 7. This court is of the considered view that no case is made out against the applicants on the basis of evidence available on record. Section 482 Cr.P.C has been incorporated to prevent the abuse of the process of the Court and to secure the ends of justice. This Court can exercise its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C if it deems necessary to give effect to any order under this Code. Section 482 Cr.P.C is as under. “482. Saving of inherent powers of High Court. —Nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code, or to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.” Learned counsel for the applicants placed reliance on the following judgments :- 1. In Vineet Kumar and Ors. Vs. State of U.P. and Ors. Manu/SC/0351/2017, the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C was allowed considering the facts of the case and the Magistrate was directed to pass fresh order. 2. In Sunder Babu and Ors. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2009) 14 SCC 244 the Apex Court found that the proceeding was maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wrecking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge, hence the complaint was quashed. 3. In Ahmad Ali Quraishi and another vs. State of U.P. and another (2020) 13 SCC 435 , the complaint was found to be mala-fide and animus in nature maliciously instituted with ulterior motives against the appellant-accused, hence the criminal proceedings were quashed. 4. In Suresh Kumar Goel and others vs. State of U.P. and another (2019) 14 SCC 318 , the complaint was found to be a counterblast to wrack vengeance by complainant against his family for disowning him. The Complaint was held to be abuse of process of Court, hence the discharge application under Section 245 (2) Cr.P.C was allowed and complainant was also directed to pay Rs. 25,000/- to each applicant by way of costs, for initiating frivolous litigation. 5. In M.N. Ojha and others vs. Alok Kumar Srivastava and others (2009) 9 SCC 682 , complaint was found clearly an abuse of judicial process to harass the appellants. 25,000/- to each applicant by way of costs, for initiating frivolous litigation. 5. In M.N. Ojha and others vs. Alok Kumar Srivastava and others (2009) 9 SCC 682 , complaint was found clearly an abuse of judicial process to harass the appellants. Averments and allegations in complaint were not disclosing commission of any offence by the appellants. The case was found to be a classic illustration of non application of mind by trial court where Magistrate had not scrutinized even the contents of the complaint, leaving a site material document available on record. All the above citations apply in favour of the appellants. On the basis of the above discussions when no case is made out against the applicants, it is duty of this Court to quash the entire proceedings of the impugned criminal case in respect of the applicants. Hence this application deserves to be allowed. ORDER This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C is allowed and the entire proceeding of the aforesaid case crime number against the applicants is hereby quashed.