The Allahabad High Court has rejected to quash the criminal proceedings, including charge-sheet against four-time MP and five-time MLA, Ramakant Yadav, in connection with the death of some people and loss of eyesight of some due to drinking poisonous liquor.
A Single Bench of Justice Raj Beer Singh passed this order while hearing an application under Section 482 filed by Ramakant Yadav.
The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been preferred for quashing of entire proceedings, including charge-sheet dated 27.05.2023 and cognizance order dated 28.06.2023, of Session Trial, (State vs Ramakant Yadav), under Section 272, 273 IPC and Section -60 Excise Act, pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Azamgarh.
Counsel for applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the case. The first information report was lodged against Rangesh Kumar Yadav and unknown persons alleging that on 21.02.2022, after receipt of information that some persons have died due to consumption of spurious liquor and some have lost their eye sight, the Excise Inspector along with police officials conducted a raid at the desi liquor shop, where 4 cartoons, each having 45 quarter bottles, containing spurious/ adulterated liquor were recovered. Similarly 145 other cartoons, each having 45 quarter bottles were also recovered. On the recovered quarter bottles, the QR code was lying damaged.
It was submitted that the licensee of said liquor shop was Rangesh Kumar Yadav and the applicant has no concern with business of alleged shop.
It was submitted that applicant is a renowned political leader and he had been a Member of Parliament for four times and M.L.A for five times and at the time of incident he was M.L.A from Samajwadi Party and that he has been falsely implicated in this case due to political reasons at behest of the present government.
Counsel for the applicant also submitted that involvement of the applicant was belatedly developed and in fact applicant was implicated due to political vendetta and there is no credible evidence against him. Without collecting any credible evidence, the Investigating Officer has charge sheeted the applicant after 14 months by way of supplementary charge sheet. The Magistrate has taken cognizance without considering material on record and later on committed the case to the court of Sessions.
The entire proceedings are malafide and result of vindictive politics and that no case is made out against the applicant. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed.
The Court said that the legal position on the issue of quashing of criminal proceedings is well-settled that the jurisdiction to quash a complaint, FIR or a charge- sheet should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases. However, where the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint and material on record even if taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused, the charge-sheet may be quashed in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the CrPC. In well celebrated judgment reported in AIR 1992 SC 605 State of Haryana and others Vs Ch Bhajan Lal, Supreme Court has carved out certain guidelines, wherein FIR or proceedings may be quashed but cautioned that the power to quash FIR or proceedings should be exercised sparingly and that too in the rarest of rare cases.
The Court further said that it is well settled that High Court ordinarily would not exercise its inherent jurisdiction to quash a criminal proceeding unless the allegations contained, even if given face value and taken to be correct in their entirety, disclosed no cognizable offence. The inherent powers for the purpose of quashing proceedings have to be exercised very sparingly. Thus, there is no controversy about the legal proposition that in case a prima facie case is made out, the FIR or the proceedings in consequence thereof cannot be quashed.
The Court observed that the first information report was lodged against Rangesh Kumar Yadav and unknown persons alleging that on 21.02.2022 after receipt of information that some persons have died due to consumption of spurious liquor and some persons have lost their eye sight, the Excise Inspector along with police officials conducted a raid at the desi liquor shop, where 4 cartoons, each having 45 quarter bottles, containing spurious/adulterated liquor were recovered. Similarly 145 other cartoons, each having 45 quarter bottles were also recovered. On the recovered quarter bottles, the QR code was lying damaged. The licensee of said liquor shop was Rangesh Kumar Yadav. During investigation the involvement of applicant-accused was revealed.
The Court further observed that during investigation some of the witnesses have clearly stated that said liquor shop was being run by the applicant-accused in the name of co-accused Rangesh Yadav and that applicant-accused was involved in business of preparation and selling of spurious liquor and due to terror of applicant-accused no one from public dares to name him. In view of these facts it could not be said that no prima facie case is made out against applicant. Merely because the applicant is not named in the first information report or that his involvement was shown after about 7 months of incident, it cannot be said that no prima facie case is made out against the applicant. At this stage it would be pertinent to refer case of State of Orissa v Saroj Kumar Sahoo, wherein Apex Court has observed that probabilities of the prosecution version cannot be analysed at this stage. Likewise, the allegations of mala fides of the informant are of secondary importance.
“In the case in view of allegations levelled against the applicant and perusing the material collected during investigation, it can not be said that no prima facie is made out against the applicant. The submissions raised by the counsel for the applicants call for determination on questions of fact which may be adjudicated upon only by the trial court and even the submissions made on points of law can also be more appropriately gone into only by the trial court in case a charge sheet is submitted in the case.
In view of aforesaid, no case for quashing of impugned proceedings/charge-sheet or cognizance/summoning order is made out. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C lacks merit, and thus, liable to be dismissed” the Court also observed while dismissing the application.