Court No. - 41
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6720 of 2019 Applicant :- Mukeem Ahmad And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shri Ram (Rawat),Giri Ram Rawat,Indra Deo Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and the learned A.G.A.
This petition is filed by the petitioners for quashing the order dated 5.1.2019 passed by CJM, Firozabad in Case No.206/2007, Case Crime No.409/2006 under Section 323, 504, 506, 307, 452 IPC PS South distt, Firozabad (State Vs. Mukeem and others).
Learned counsel for petitioners submits that this Court on 4.10.2018 in earlier Application U/s 482 No.35911 of 2018 passed detailed order on, the relevant portion of which reads as follows:-
"No coercive measures shall be adopted against the applicants for a period of three months from today or till disposal of the discharge application, whichever is earlier.
If the concerned court after hearing the counsel for the accused feels persuaded to have the view that the accused ought not to have been summoned and the charge is groundless it shall not abstain from discharging the accused only on the ground that the material available at the time of summoning was the same which is available on record at the time of hearing the discharge application. On the other hand if the lower court even after hearing the counsel for accused holds the view that the accused has been rightly summoned and the material brought on record does not indicate the charges to be groundless it shall make an order to that effect and proceed further in the matter in accordance with law and shall also be free to adopt such measures to procure the attendance of the accused as the law permits.
It is clarified that if applicants do not avail of this order within the stipulated period of time no application for extension of time shall be entertained.
With the above observations, this application stands disposed of."
Learned counsel for petitioners further submits that learned CJM, Firozabad by order dated 4.1.2019 has already rejected the discharge application on the ground that it is the only Sessions Trial who will consider the discharge application under the given Sections.
The matter is not yet committed for trial to Sessions Court.
After arguing at some length, learned counsel for petitioners submits that grievance of petitioners would be sufficiently met in case bail application of petitioners is considered expeditiously in accordance with law.
In view thereof, it is provided that if the petitioners surrender before the Court below within three weeks from today and apply for bail, the Court below will consider the same, in accordance with law in view of the observations made in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in [2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC)].
For a period of three weeks, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners.
With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 22.2.2019 RajneeshDR) (Vivek Chaudhary, J.)