Court No. - 53
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2133 of 2019 Applicant :- Prakhar Singh Soni Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar 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, 1973 (in short 'Code') has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 19.07.2017 in Case Crime No. 1109 of 2016, Complaint Case No. 2496 of 2017 (State vs. Prakhar Soni), whereby the applicant has been summoned under Sections- 341, 352, 353, 504 I.P.C. and 7 Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1860 as well as entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 2496 of 2017 (State vs. Prakhar Soni).
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer so made and contention thereof raised by learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that material on record is sufficient for justifying initiation of proceedings and passing of the impugned summoning order by the court below. As such, there is no illegality in the impugned order passed by the Magistrate concerned.
From the perusal of first information report and material brought on record, and looking into the facts of the case, it cannot be said, at this stage, that no offence is made out against the applicant.
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 the Code.
Accordingly, the prayer for quashing the impugned summoning order as well as the entire proceedings in the aforesaid case is refused.
However, none of the aforesaid offences alleged against applicant is punishable with imprisonment for more than seven years. All the materials relevant for disposal of bail application is available on record before trial court/court concerned.
In view of order passed by this Court in the case of Smt. Sakeena and another v. State of U.P. and another reported in 2018 (2) ACR 2190, it is directed that in case the applicant files his bail application, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided on the same day. If for any reason it is not possible to decide the regular bail application on the same day, then prayer for interim bail shall be considered and decided on the same day.
For a period of 60 days from today or till the applicant, Prakhar Singh Soni, surrenders and applies for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against him.
With the aforesaid observations/directions, the instant application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 21.1.2019 Rohit