Court No. - 75
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 40579 of 2018
Applicant :- Govind Swaroop Verma And 4 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Katyayini,Krishnarjun
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants for quashing of the revisinal order dated 11.10.2018 in Criminal Revisin No. 256 of 2018, Raj Kumar Verma and others Vs. State and another, passed by Session Judge, Aligarh and summoning order dated 10..5.2018 in complaint case no. 1919 of 2016, under section 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. P.S. Quarsi, District Aligarh. pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Aligarh.
As per the allegation made in the complaint, it is alleged that on 9.9.2016 at about 8.30 a.m. the applicants assaulted the victim Ramesh due to which he suffered injuries on his person and has been medically examined.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present application has been instituted with a malfide intention for the purposes of harassment. He has also pointed out certain documents 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, disputed question of fact cannot be considered, therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs.
P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283, the prayer for quashing the impugned order dated 11.10.2018 and 10.5.2018 is refused.
However, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within forty five days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of settled law laid down by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC).
For a period of forty days from today or till the applicants surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 27.11.2019 R