Court No. - 76
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3571 of 2009 Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar And Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Abhijit Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Arvendra Singh
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire proceeding including impugned order dated 11.12.2008 passed by Special Judge (D.A.A.), Mainpuri whereby the applicants have been summoned by ex-parte order in Special Trial No.121/2008, under Section 395 I.P.C., Police Station Bewar, District Mainpuri.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that sister of applicant nos.2 and 3 and daughter of applicant no.4 was married to opposite party no.2. The FIR has been lodged by the applicants against opposite party no.2 under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act. It has been submitted that as a counter blast, the opposite party no.2 has moved an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. stating therein that on 22.02.2007 at about 8.30 p.m. when he was busy in bidai, at that time the applicants, armed with weapons, along with 5-6 unknown persons came at his house and abused him. He was also beaten by them. Rs.25,000/-, jewellery and other materials were also looted. For the aforesaid incident the complainant went to the police station but nothing was done. Thereafter an application was moved on 17.03.2007 with a request to get the FIR lodged. Police report was called in which the incident has been admitted. On the basis of that, the court concerned has ordered that the matter be registered and investigated. After investigation final report was submitted and a protest was filed by the opposite party in which statements under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. of complainant and other accused have been recorded.
Learned counsel for the applicants submit that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of causing harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.
Having heard the learned counsel for the applicants and perused the materials brought on record, it does not appear to be a fit case to quash the impugned order. The prayer to quash the same is hereby refused, at this stage, as the argument raised by learned counsel for the applicants involves factual disputes and appraisal of evidence.
However, looking at the nature of offence alleged and attending facts and circumstances of the case, as have been brought on record, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall 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 judgement passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
For a period of 30 days from today, no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.
The present application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 27.11.2019 Anand Sri./-