Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 46435 of 2019 Applicant :- Muneesh Khan And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Adil Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. representing the State. Perused the records.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by applicants Muneesh Khan and five others against State of U.P. and Furkan Ahmad with prayer to quash the summoning order dated 22.10.2019 passed by A.C.J.M., Amroha, as well as entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 333 of 2019, Furkan Ahmad Vs. Muneesh Khan and others, under Sections 452, 323, 504 I.P.C., P.S. Bachhrayun, district Amroha (J.P. Nagar).
Learned counsel for the applicants argued that it is a counter blast case filed under misuse of process of law. A non- cognizable report was got registered on 8.6.2019. It was for an occurrence, which occurred on 8.6.2019 upon report of Muneesh Khan against present complainant and his family members, wherein an application for investigation u/s 155 Cr.P.C. was filed. There was injury in medico-legal report and after it, this counter blast accusation was concocted wherein applicants have been summoned. Hence this application with above prayer.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the above argument.
From the very perusal of complaint, it is apparent that this occurrence, for which summoning is there, occurred on 16.6.2019, whereas previous occurrence is of 8.6.2019 i.e. both of occurrences are different and are of different dates. Registration of previous NCR may a reason for counter blast case as well as it may be a reason for this occurrence. But in either way it is a question of fact to be seen by the trial court. The contention of complaint was reiterated in the statement u/s 200 Cr.P.C. and corroborated in the statement u/s 202 Cr.P.C. in the enquiry made by the Magistrate. This court in exercise of inherent jurisdiction u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is not to embark upon factual matrix, which is to be seen during trial by the trial court. There is no misuse of process of law. Accordingly, this application merits its dismissal.
However, in the interest of justice, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within thirty days from today and apply for bail, then the bail application of the applicants be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid 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 reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
For a period of thirty days from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of 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.
Order Date :- 19.12.2019 Pcl