Court No. - 44
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28485 of 2018 Applicant :- Ajeet And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anirudh Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Anirudh Kumar Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicants and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 has been filed challenging the orders dated 09.07.2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (E.C. Act), Moradabad in Criminal Revision No. 297 of 2017 (Ajeet and others Vs. State of U.P. and another) arising out Criminal Case no. 5837 of 2017 (Kranti Devi Vs. Ajeet and others) under Sections 452, 323 I.P.C P.S.-Bilari, District-Moradabad.
From the record, it appears that the applicants were summoned in Criminal Case No. 5837 of 2017 (Kranti Devi Vs. Ajeet and others) under Sections 452 and 323 I.P.C., Police Station-Bilari, District-Moradabad vide order dated 19.09.2017. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid summoning order, the applicants filed Criminal Misc. Application No. 35380 of 2017 (Ajeet and 3 others Vs. State of U.P. and another ) which was decided finally vide order dated 30.10.2017.
For ready reference, the order dated 30.10.2017 is reproduced herein under:
" The present application has been filed by the applicants under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of complaint case no. 5837 of 2017 (Smt. Kanti Devi Vs. Ajeet & others), under Sections 452, 323 IPC, Police Station Bilari, District - Moradabad arising out of summoning order dated 19.9.2017 pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Moradabad. Further prayer has been made to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned AGA appearing for the State.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that the complaint was filed on the basis of false facts and also on the basis of malice. It is further submitted that from the version of the complaint as well as statement of witnesses, offence under the aforesaid Sections is not made out against the applicants. General allegations have been made in the complaint. The impugned order suffers from illegality and infirmity.
On the other hand, learned AGA has submitted that applicants have been summoned on the basis of the statements recorded under Sections 200 Cr.P.C. and 202 Cr.P.C.. The impugned order does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, after perusing the entire record and having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that no case is made out to interfere with the impugned order. The impugned order does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality. The Magistrate dealing with complaint at this stage has to see only prima-facie case and it cannot be said that no prima-facie case is made out against the applicants. Further, the plea raised before this Court would require leading of evidence, which can be raised before the court concerned at the appropriate Stage. Hence, the prayer made in the present application is refused.
However, it is observed that in case the applicants surrender before the court below and apply for bail within 30 days from today the same shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law. For a period of 30 days from today, no coercive action shall be taken/given effect to against the applicants. It is made clear that no further time will be allowed to the applicants for surrender before the court concerned.
With the above observations, the application stands disposed of. "
Subsequently, aggrieved by summoning order dated 19.09.2017, the applicants filed above mentioned criminal revision, which has been dismissed by means of the order dated 09.07.2018.
From the facts as noted herein above, it is explicitly clear that the summoning order dated 19.09.2017 as well as the entire proceedings of the complaint case had already been challenged before this Court by means of Criminal Misc. Application No. 35380 of 2017 (Ajeet and 3 others Vs. State of U.P. and another). Therefore, no criminal revision against the summoning order was maintainable before the Sessions Court, Moradabad. In view of the above, no illegality was committed by the revisional court in dismissing the above mentioned criminal revision.
From the facts as noted herein above, this Court does not find any good ground to interfere with the present application.
The present application fails and is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 5.9.2018 YK