Dal Pratap Singh @ Dala vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Dayal Khare, J.—Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. This application u/s 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3440 of 2009 arising out of case crime No. 187 of 2008 u/s 26 of Indian Forest Act 1927 Section 3/4 of Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act, Section 4/10 Forest Conservation Act and Section 379 IPC, police station Haliya district Mirzapur pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I Mirzapur.

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant had earlier lodged the first information report against the Forest Mafia and others and the opposite party No. 2 was also found to be involved in irregular activities of illegally cutting of trees etc. It is argued that since the applicant had lodged first information report with regard to the illegal cutting of trees, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the complainant in the present case and the proceedings against the applicant are mala fide.

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 submission made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of power conferred u/s 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. The State of Punjab, , State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, , State of Bihar and Another Vs. P.P. Sharma, IAS and Another, and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and Others Vs. Md. Sharaful Haque and Others, . The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicant has got a right of discharge u/s 239 or 227/228 or 245 Cr.P.C. as the case may be through a proper application for the said purpose and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.

The prayer for quashing the proceedings is refused.

However, it is provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, then the bail application of the applicant be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amarawati and Another (Smt.) Vs. State of U.P., as well as judgment passed by Hon''ble Apex Court reported in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others, For a period of 30 days from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him. With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.