Court No. - 73
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 25211 of 2019 Applicant :- Sonu @ Gourav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shravan Kumar Pandey,Shyam Narain Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
The present application has been filed by the applicant under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of complaint case no. 1719 of 2018 (Smt. Aneeta Vs. Sonu @ Gourav and others), under Sections 323, 354 504 IPC, Police Station Hafizpur, District Hapur arising out of summoning order dated 23.5.2019 pending in the court of Civil Judge (S.D.)/F.T.C., Hapur. Further prayer has been made to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned AGA appearing for the State.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that opposite party no. 2 is the wife of the brother in law of the applicant. Entire allegations levelled against him are false. It appears improbable and unbelievable that a lady will instigate her husband to do such type of offence. It is next contended that during pendency of the present matter another FIR has also been lodged by the opposite party no. 2 only to create pressure and harass the applicant. There is property dispute. Summoning order passed in the matter is illegal.
On the other hand, learned AGA has submitted that applicant has been summoned on the basis of the statements recorded under Sections 200 Cr.P.C. and 202 Cr.P.C.. The impugned order does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, after perusing the entire record and having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that no case is made out to interfere with the impugned order. The impugned order does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality. The Magistrate dealing with 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. Further, the plea raised before this Court would require leading of evidence, which can be raised before the court concerned at the appropriate Stage. Hence, the prayer made in the present application is refused.
At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant prays that a direction may be issued to the court below for expeditious disposal of the bail application of the applicant.
Hence, it is directed that in case the applicant surrenders before the court below and applies for bail within 30 days from today the same shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law. For a period of 30 days from today, no coercive action shall be taken/given effect to against the applicant. It is made clear that no further time will be allowed to the applicant for surrender before the court concerned.
With the above observations, the application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.7.2019 Sachdeva