Court No. - 24
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7983 of 2003 Applicant :- Chhotey Lal Verma & Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. & Another Counsel for Applicant :- Suresh Chandra Verma,Murtuza Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,A.K. Srivastava
Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned AGA.
The instant petition seeks quashing of the proceedings relating to Criminal Case No. 1973 of 2002 (State Vs. Chhotey Lal and others) under Section 406/452/323/504/506 IPC, P.S. Kotwali, Farrukhabad as well as the orders dated 4 July 2002 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Farrukhabad and the order dated 24.7.2003 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Tract Court No. 2, Farrukhabad.
The primary submission advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants is that the Magistrate has proceeded to take cognizance on the complaint and issued summons without noticing that in the entire case diary, copy of the debit note, on the basis of which it is claimed that a loan had been given to the applicants is not on the record. It is also additionally submitted that for the recovery of the alleged loan, a civil suit has also been instituted. It has been lastly submitted that the instant proceedings had been lodged as a counter blast to Case Crime No. 517 of 2001 in which the opposite party has been chargesheeted and is presently on bail. The Court notes that the applicants have been summoned under Sections 406/452/323/504/506 IPC. At the stage of taking cognizance, the Magistrate has to be only prima facie satisfied on the materials led before it that there is grave suspicion of the crime having been committed. If the aforesaid test is applied, it is evident that no illegality has been committed. The mere fact that the suit has been instituted cannot possibly detract from the commission of the offences in which the applicants have been summoned. The evidence of a debit note and all other submissions raised in respect thereof are all subject matters which touch upon the merits of the proposed trial and cannot form subject matter of consideration by this Court in exercise of the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
The prayer for quashing the entire proceedings is refused.
After this order was passed, the learned counsel for the applicants sought for a direction being issued for the expeditious consideration of the bail application. The prayer so made is granted and it is provided that in case the applicants apply for bail, the same shall be considered by the concerned Court on its own merits bearing in mind the decisions rendered by this Court as well as the Supreme Court on the subject of grant of bail.
Order Date :- 27.7.2018/LA/-