RINKU @ YASHWANT SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA. By moving the present application under section 482 Cr. P.C., charge sheet dated 19.01.2013 in Case No. 63 of 2013, arising out of Case Crime No. 399 of 2012, under Sections 147, 332 IPC, P.S. Etmadpur, District Agra, have been prayed to be quashed.

(2.) 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 relates to the disputed question 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. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicant has got a right of discharge before the trial Court through a proper application for the said purpose and he is free to take all the submission in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.

(3.) HOWEVER , it is directed that if the applicant appears before the court concerned within a period of 30 days from today along with the certified copy of this order and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in : 2004 (57) ALR 290 and the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in : 2009 (4) SCC 437, after hearing the public prosecutor.