(Dinesh Maheshwari and Vikram Nath, JJ.)
Dashrath Nath Shukla ________________________________ Appellant;
v.
State of U.P. and Others ____________________________ Petitioner(s);
Criminal Appeal No. 1408 of 2021 (@ SLP (Crl.) No. 7793 of 2021), decided on November 15, 2021
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. Leave granted.
2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material placed on record, we find it difficult to endorse the impugned order dated 24.08.2021, as passed by the High Court in rejection of the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by the present appellant.
3. A perusal of the order impugned makes out that in relation to the prayer for quashing the chargesheet and the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 528 of 2020 arising out of Case Crime No. 317 of 2018 for offences under Sections 406, 504 and 506 IPC, the High Court took note of the submissions on behalf of the appellant that the FIR in question was disclosing no offence against him as also the contra submissions of the Government counsel that prima facie offence was made out and then, observed as under:—
“From the perusal of the materials on record and looking into the facts of the case and after considering the arguments made at the bar, it does not appear that no offence has been made out against the applicant.”
4. After having said so, the High Court referred to the principle that at the stage of issuing process, the Court below is not expected to examine and assess the material placed on record in detail; and that the High Court would not embark upon an inquiry, which was the function of the Trial Court. With such observations, the High Court declined to interfere while observing that the applicant (the present appellant) shall have ample opportunity to raise all objections at the appropriate stage.
5. Even when assessment of the material on record in detail is not expected and the High Court may not be expected to take up a factual inquiry, yet it cannot be said that the submissions made on behalf of the appellant and their correlation with the facts of the case require no consideration at all, particularly when several submissions are sought to be made by the appellant that the transaction in question was essentially a transaction between his son and the complainant; that the ingredients of the offence under Section 406 are not made out; and that supplementation of the offences under Sections 504 and 506 is only intended to give a colour of criminality to a simple money transaction. The appellant also seeks to refer to the statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C., said to have been made by two other witnesses, who have been allegedly excluded from the chargesheet.
6. We are not commenting on the merits of the case either way but are clearly of the view that on the given set of facts and circumstances, it was required that the contentions sought to be urged by the appellant as also the counter submissions of the contesting parties were given due consideration by the High Court; and the application filed by the present appellant under Section 482 Cr.P.C. could not have been rejected merely with a few observations of general nature. In this view of the matter, we have no option but to set aside the order impugned and restore the matter for reconsideration by the High Court.
7. Accordingly, this appeal succeeds to the extent and in the manner indicated above; the impugned order dated 24.08.2021 is set aside; and the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. bearing No. 8317 of 2021 is restored for reconsideration by the High Court.
8. Needless to observe that we have not made any comments on the merits of the case and all the contentions of the parties are left open.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 7793/2021
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 24-08-2021 in A482 No. 8317/2021 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad)
Dashrath Nath Shukla.….Petitioner(s)
v.
State of U.P. & Ors.….Respondent(s)
(IA No. 131529/2021 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 131530/2021 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)
Date : 15-11-2021 This matter was called on for hearing today.
(Before Dinesh Maheshwari and Vikram Nath, JJ.)
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sanjay Mani Tripathi, Adv.
Ms. Anu Gupta, AOR
Mr. Kulwant Singh Narwal, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Ms. Srishti Singh, AOR
Mr. K.B. Upadhayay, Adv.
Mr. S. R. Setia, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
ORDER
9. Leave granted.
10. The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order.
11. All the pending applications stand disposed of.
———
