Court No. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 15541 of 2019 Applicant :- Ram Pyare And Another Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Daya Shanker Yadav,Mahendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for parties and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Code') has been filed on behalf of the applicants with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 26.11.2016 passed by Judicial Magistrate-Ist, Bhadohi, Gyanpur, the entire proceedings of Misc. Case No. 187 of 2014 (Sita Ram v. Ram Pyare and others) filed under Section 156(3) of the Code and also the order of N.B.W. dated 22.09.2017.
Learned counsel for the applicants contended that applicant no.
1 Ram Pyare has lodged first information report against opposite party no. 2 Sita Ram and three other persons, in which after investigation, the police submitted charge sheet. After one year of the occurrence, opposite party no. 2 filed this complaint maliciously, with false allegation, only to harass the applicants, showing cross-version of the F.I.R. lodged by applicant no. 1 Ram Pyare against him and three others. In the case of F.I.R. lodged by applicant no. 1 Ram Pyare against opposite party no. 2 Sita Ram and three others, proceedings have been stayed by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.02.2017 passed in Application u/s 482 No. - 39316 of 2016 (Sita Ram and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another).
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer 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 orders in the aforesaid case against the applicants.
Proceedings of cross case being stayed by this Court is no ground to stay the proceedings of this case.
From the perusal of complaint and material 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 applicants.
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 proceedings as well as the impugned orders in the aforesaid case is refused.
Learned counsel for the applicants further contended that applicant no. 1 Ram Pyare has been enlarged on bail by the trial court on the same day.
None of the aforesaid offences alleged against applicants 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 no. 2 - Subas 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 his 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 no. 2 - Subas 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 :- 30.4.2019 I. Batabyal