Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Arun Dodiyal And Another vs State Of U P And Another

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|12 October, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 1
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 32646 of 2018 Applicant :- Arun Dodiyal And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pawan Singh Pundir Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Heard Sri Pawan Singh Pundir, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Irshad Hussain learned A.G.A for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the order dated 18.08.2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge Court no.2, Saharanpur in Criminal Revision No.312 of 2016 and summoning order dated 22.07.2016 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate IInd, Saharanpur in Case No. 378 of 2016 by which the applicants have been summoned for facing the trial under Sections 420, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Janakpuri, District Saharanpur and stay the further proceeding of Case No. 378 of 2016 Parkhar Gourav Vs Arun Dodiyal and another under Sections 420, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Janakpuri, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate IInd, Saharanpur, passed in the aforesaid case.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicants that there was tenancy dispute of the applicant with one Ashok Kumar Saha and the opposite party no.2 happens to be the business partner of the said Ashok Kumar Saha, on account of which the present complaint has been filed by opposite party no.2 at the behest of the said person with whom the applicant was having some enmity. He further submits that the allegation levelled against the applicant is absolutely false, frivolous and baseless.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the impugned order and submitted that against the summoning order, applicant preferred a revision before lower revisional court which has been dismissed and it is stated that opposite party no.2 is not related with the person with whom it is stated that applicant was a business partner.
Considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order. From a perusal of the impugned order, it is apparent that the learned Magistrate has passed the said order after having found prima facie case made out against the applicants and cognizable offence is disclosed from the perusal of the complaint as well as the statement of the complainant and its witnesses recorded under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C.
In view of the above, no ground for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case as well as the order dated 18.08.2018 and 22.07.2016, is made out which may call for any interference by this Court in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as the same do not suffer from any illegality or infirmity. Hence, the prayer for quashing the same is refused.
However, if the applicant moves a bail application before the court below, the court below shall consider the same in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid directions, the present 482 Cr.P.C. application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 12.10.2018 Ashok Gupta
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Arun Dodiyal And Another vs State Of U P And Another

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
12 October, 2018
Judges
  • Ramesh Sinha
Advocates
  • Pawan Singh Pundir