Court No. - 73
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 25329 of 2019 Applicant :- Vipin Kumar And 3 Ors. Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Applicant :- Suchit Tandon Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
The present application has been filed by the applicants under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of complaint case no. 1142/9 of 2013 (Ganesh Bindal Vs. Harmandeep Singh and others), under Section 420 IPC, Police Station Kairana, District -Shamli arising out of summoning order dated 18.4.2015 pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kairana, Shamli. Further prayer has been made to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned AGA appearing for the State.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicant no. 4 sold the disputed property on the basis of authorisation given by the company. It is also argued that applicant no. 1 and 2 are the witnesses of the said sale deed. It is further argued that offence under Section 420 IPC is not made out in the present matter. Since company vide its resolution had given authorisation to the applicants, therefore, sale deed executed by the applicant no. 4 cannot be said to be void document. No prima facie case is made out. At this juncture, learned counsel for the applicants referred to the documents annexed with the supplementary affidavit i.e. M.O.U., copy of statement of witnesses, authorisation deed as well as notarised declaration. It is next contended that if entire complaint allegations are taken into consideration, then also a civil suit is pending between the parties.
On the other hand, learned AGA has submitted that a forged letter was prepared by the applicant no. 1 and on that basis sale deed has been executed in connivance with the applicant no. 2 and 3. The impugned order does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity. No prima facie case is made out.
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 applicants. 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 applicants prays that a direction may be issued to the court below for expeditious disposal of the bail application of the applicants.
Hence, it is directed that in case the applicants surrender before the court below and apply 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 applicants. It is made clear that no further time will be allowed to the applicants for surrender before the court concerned.
With the above observations, the application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.8.2019 Sachdeva