Court No. - 48
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5041 of 2017 Applicant :- Hari Shankar @ Monti Yadav And 7 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ray Sahab Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ravindra Kumar
Hon'ble Karuna Nand Bajpayee,J.
This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking the quashing of the entire proceeding of Case No. 88 of 2016, Smt. Samiksha versus Hari Shankar and others, under Section 12 of the Prevention of Women from Domestic Violence Act, P.S. Kotwali Orai, District Jalaun pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Jalaun at Orai.
Case has been called out but none appears on behalf of the applicants to press this application despite repeated calls. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 is present along with learned A.G.A. The order sheet dated 8.3.3018 shows that on that date an illness slip was sent on behalf of learned counsel for the applicants and this Court was constrained to observe that the counsel for the applicants must ensure his presence on the next date in the first round otherwise, the Court shall proceed to decide the matter on the basis of record in his absence and the case shall not be adjourned on the ground of absence of counsel or his illness. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 vehemently opposes the adjournment and submits that deliberately the presence is being avoided in order to delay the hearing of the matter. In the wake of heavy pendency of the cases where dockets are already bursting on their seams the Court does not see any good ground to adjourn the case and procrastinate the matter further. Therefore, the Court is proceeding to decide this case on merits on the basis of its record taking the assistance of learned A.G.A.
It seems that in order to explore the possibility of an amicable settlement between the parties, the matter was referred to undergo mediation proceedings on 15.2.2017.The report of the Mediation Centre dated 24.9.2017 reveals that the aforesaid attempt could not succeed and did not bear any fruit for certain reasons.
The perusal of grounds taken in the application reveals that most of them relate to disputed questions of fact. It is apparent from the perusal of grounds that whatever pleas in defence have been raised, both factual and legal, can be adequately gone into by the court below itself. The court below can more appropriately look into the same and adjudicate more appropriately upon them.This Court cannot have a kind of pre- trial before the actual trial or the legal proceedings take place in the court below. There is absolutely nothing perceptible in the impugned proceedings which may call for any interference by this Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction. The Court does not perceive any illegality, incorrectness or any abuse of court's process in the impugned proceedings.
The application being sans merit stands dismissed.
Office is directed to communicate this order forthwith to the lower court concerned.
Order Date :- 25.9.2018 CPP/-