Court No. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 15893 of 2019
Applicant :- Murlidhar Gaurwa And 2 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Sharma,Prashant Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'Code') has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 22.03.2017 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Sikandrarau as well as the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 108 of 2016 (Kalpana v. Murlidhar Gaurwa and others), under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Police Station - Sikandrarau, District - Hathras.
Learned counsel for the applicants contended that in the complaint, no specific role has been assigned to applicant no. 3 Jasoda Devi.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer made and contention raised by learned counsel for the applicants and contended that the material on record was sufficient for justifying initiation of the criminal proceedings and passing of the impugned summoning order in the aforesaid case against the applicants.
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.
All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 of Code.
In view of the above, the prayer for quashing the entire proceedings as well as the impugned summoning order in the aforesaid case is refused.
However, it is directed that if applicant nos. 1 and 2 - Murlidhar Gaurwa and Leeladhar Gaurwa apply for bail, the same shall be disposed of on the same day on which they are taken into custody as per the guidelines prescribed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar and Another v. Union of India reported in 2018 SCC OnLine SC 1501.
It is further directed that if applicant no. 3 - Jasoda Devi files discharge application under Section 245 (2) of the Code through counsel within 30 days from today, the same shall be decided by the trial court/Magistrate concerned by a reasoned and speaking order, in view of the judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Geeta Mehrotra and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Another reported in (2012) 10 SCC 741.
Apart from arguing on the merits of the case, learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the case may be send to mediation centre so that it may be amicably settled between the parties through mediation.
In view of the order dated 15.11.2018 passed by this Court in Application u/s 482 No. - 37845 of 2018 (Rajan Awasthi and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another), this Court cannot send the matter to the mediation centre for mediation/settlement.
In view of above, prayer for sending the matter to the mediation centre is also refused.
For a period of 60 days from today or till the applicant nos. 1 and 2 - Murlidhar Gaurwa and Leeladhar Gaurwa surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against them.
Till the disposal of discharge application, no coercive action shall be taken against applicant no. 3 - Jasoda Devi.
With the aforesaid observations/directions, the instant application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.4.2019
I. Batabyal