Court No. - 55
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39207 of 2018 Applicant :- Anil Kumar And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Abhinav Prasad,learned AGA and perused the record.
The present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the summoning order dated 22.03.2017 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasganj in Complaint Case No. 5271 of 2016 (Rekha Vs. Anil Kumar and others), under Sections 498-A, 323 IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Dholana, District- Kasganj.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.
From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicant has got a right of discharge under section 239 or 227/228, or 245 Cr.P.C. as the case may be through a proper application for the said purpose and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.
The prayer for quashing the entire proceedings is refused. However, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court concerned within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their bail application shall be considered and decided by the court below expeditiously, if possible on the same day, in accordance with the settled law laid down by the Seven Judges' decision of this Court in the case of Amarawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR-290 as well as judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. For a period of 30 days from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case applicants do not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
With the above directions, present application is disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.10.2018 Arti