Court No. - 69

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1942 of 2023

Applicant :- Mohd Haroon

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Pandey

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

1. List revised.

2. Heard Shri Deepak Pandey and Sri Somit Shukla, learned counsels for

the applicant, Sri B.B. Upadhyay and Ms. Arti Agarwal, learned counsels

for the State and perused the material brought on record.

3. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the

applicant with the following prayers:-

"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court

may graciously be pleased to quash the impugned charge sheet

no.182 dated 8.9.2022 in Case No.10417 of 2022 (State Vs. Mohd.

Haroon) arising out of Case Crime No.248 of 2022, u/s 354, 354A,

354D and 509 IPC, P.S. Kotwali, District Hamirpur.

It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be

pleased to stay the further proceedings of Case No.10417 of 2022

(State Vs. Mohd. Haroon) arising out of Case Crime No.248 of

2022, u/s 354, 354A, 354D and 509 IPC, P.S. Kotwali, District

Hamirpur, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Jr. Division) F.T.C

Crime against Women Court, Hamirpur."

4. This Court is not dilating with the facts of the present case for the

reasons given below:-

The applicant is an accused in Case Crime No.248 of 2022, under

Sections 354, 354-A, 354-D and 509 IPC, Police Station Kotwali,

District Hamirpur. The present application under Section 482

Cr.P.C. has been filed by him for quashing of the charge sheet dated

8.9.2022. Previously the applicant had filed an application under

Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the prayer to quash/set-aside the order

dated 15.11.2022 passed in the said case by which the discharge

application of the applicant was rejected. The said application under

Section 482 Cr.P.C. which was numbered as Criminal Misc.

Application U/S 482 No.1558 of 2023 (Mohd. Haroon Vs. State of

U.P. and another) stood rejected by this Court vide order dated

16.1.2023. This Court while dismissing the said application held

that prima facie evidence is there against the applicant and as such

the order rejecting the discharge application is just and as such

refused to interfere in the said petition.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that this Court to secure the

ends of justice can interfere in the matter at this stage even after dismissal

of the earlier Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the order of

rejection of discharge application and quash the proceedings against the

applicant. It is argued that the allegations against the applicant are totally

absurd. No offence is made out against the applicant. It is argued that the

fundamental right and liberty of the applicant are even curtailed because

of the present criminal case. The same is a harassment to him. He is a

practicing lawyer of the district court and as such the proceedings be

quashed.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the state opposed the prayer for

quashing and argued that finding a prima facie case being made out

against the applicant and a report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C./Charge

Sheet has been submitted against him on which the trial court took

cognizance and summoned him vide order dated 13.2.2022. It is argued

that application for discharge was rejected by the trial court which has

been upheld by this Court which would further go to show that prima

facie case is made out against the applicant. The present case is devoid of

any merits and deserves to be dismissed.

7. After having heard learned counsel for both the parties and perusing the

records, it is evident that previously the applicant had filed Criminal Misc.

Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No.1558 of 2023 challenging the order of

rejection of discharge application dated 15.11.2022 which stood dismissed

by this Court vide order dated 16.1.2023. The said order reads as

follows:-

“1. The present application un