Court No. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6849 of 2019 Applicant :- Rameshwar Prasad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Lakshmi Kant Pandey,Sunil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the impugned summoning order dated 5.11.2018 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st, Bhadohi- Gyanpur in complaint case no. 696 of 2016, Kedar Nath Vs. Rameshwar Prasad, under section 406 I.P.C. Police station Suriyawan District Bhadohi.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.
Learned A.G.A. argued that the applicant has been summoned to face trial on the basis of statements of complainant and witnesses recorded under sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. Learned Magistrate after considering the entire evidence available on record and finding a prima facie case has summoned the applicant to face trial. There is no illegality or irregularity in the summoning order and there is no ground to quash the entire proceeding of the aforementioned case.
A perusal of record shows that the applicant has been summoned to face trial on the basis of statements of complainant and witnesses recorded under sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. Learned Magistrate after considering the entire evidence available on record and finding a prima facie case has summoned the applicant to face trial. I find no illegality or irregularity in the summoning order. The Magistrate dealing with the complaint at this stage has to see only prima facie case and it cannot be said that no prima facie case is made out against the applicant. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I don't find any ground to quash the summoning order passed in the aforementioned case, therefore, the prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused.
However, it is directed that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, his 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 Apex 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 or till the applicant surrenders and applies for bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.2.2019 Gss