Court No. - 60
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 17249 of 2015
Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Sinha
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. & Another
Counsel for Applicant :- B.B. Panday
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Kirtikar Pandey
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
Heard Sri B.B. Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Kirtikar Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the order dated 21.5.2015 by which the criminal revision No. 35 of 2015 (Ajay Kumar Sinha Vs. Shri Niwas Dubey) has been dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (E.C. Act), Ghazipur and summoning order dated 22.1.2015 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghazipur and proceedings of Complaint Case No. 5350 of 2014 (Shri Niwas Dubey Vs. Ajay Kumar Sinha), under Sections 352, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Ghazipur, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghazipur.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the informant is subordinate employee working under him and he has filed the complaint case against him. It is further submitted that on the date of incident, he was on medical leave of one day. It is next submitted that in such cases plea of alibi cannot be taken into consideration. It is also submitted that as per law laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of Raj Kumar Vs. State of H.P. reported in 2008 LawSuit (SC) 226 and Soyebbhai Yusufbhai Bharania and others Vs. State of Gujarat reported in 2017 LawSuit (SC) 276, it was held that the High Court should not have interfered with the concurrent findings recorded by the Trial Court and the Sessions Judge in exercise of revisional jurisdiction when there was no error of fact or law arrived at by the Trial Court or the Sessions Judge.
I have perused the complaint, summoning order dated 22.1.2015 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghazipur and revisional order dated 21.5.2015 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (E.C. Act), Ghazipur. Prima facie, a case is made out against the applicant, therefore, there is no illegality or perversity in issuance of summoning order 22.1.2015 as well as in passing of the revisional order dated 21.5.2015. The prayer for quashing the summoning order dated 22.1.2015, revisional order dated 21.5.2015 and proceedings of the aforesaid complaint case is refused.
However, it is directed that in case the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously, strictly in accordance with law after hearing the public prosecutor.
For a period of 30 days from today, no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.
It is made clear that in case the applicant does not apply for bail before the court below within the aforesaid period, it is open for the court below to proceed against the applicant in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid direction, this application is disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.10.2018 Rmk.