Court No. - 27
Reserved on 17.12.2018 Delivered on 19.12.2018
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5825 of 2010 Revisionist :- Smt. Manju Sabbarwal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Revisionist :- C.P. Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
1. Heard Sri C.P. Singh, learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The petitioner has preferred this petition challenging the order passed by the Court below. The opposite party No.2 was issued with notice but none has appeared today.
3. A complaint case No.154 of 2010 under Section 323, 504, 506 and 342 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') against the revisionist hererin. Petitioner is the estranged wife of Opposite Party No.2. The IIIrd A.C.J.M., Gautam Buddh Nagar passed judicial orders dated 19.7.2010 and 18.11.2010. Bailable warrant has been issued against the revisionist.
4. Brief facts as revealed in the F.I.R. go to show that the revisionist and one another lady assaulted the opposite party No.2 in public place.
5. The fact that the other litigations are pending between the husband and wife. The children have deposed against the husband. These are all questions which are related to the other litigations. In this case, the learned Magistrate has felt that prima face case to summon the petitioner is made out and on her not appearing she was issued bailable warrant.
6. While entertaining this revision, this Court has passed order dated 20.12.2010. Last paragraph of the order is as follows:
“In view of the above, it is directed that till the next date of listing, further proceedings of order dated 19.07.2010 and 18.11.2010 passed in Complaint Case No.154 of 2010 passed by A.C.J.M., Gautam Budh Nagar shall remain stayed.”
7. Provision of Section 397 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.') being invoked as order of the learned Magistrate is a non-speaking order, is the submission of learned counsel for the revisionist. It is further stated that the entire story is a concocted story and is a counter blast. The petitioner was employed with Union Bank of India and was transferred at Haraula, Noida, District Gautam Budh Nagar as Assistant Manager. All these are question of facts.
8. The medical certificate issued would also go to show that the learned judge has looked into all the aspects of the case.
9. Just because the petitioner was not present on 3.2.2010, will not absolve her of not appearing before the Court below.
10. The petitioner to appear before the Court below and apply for both discharge as well as bail application. The proceedings of Complaint Case No.154 of 2010 cannot be quashed under Section 397 of Cr.P.C. as prima facie case is made out.
11. Orders dated 19.7.2010 and 18.11.2010 shall remain stayed till she appears before the Court below and applies for bail/discharge application not later than 11.1.2019.
12. In view of the above, this application is partly allowed.
Order Date :- 19.12.2018 DKS