HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 11 Case :- U/S 482/378/407 No. - 1999 of 2012 Petitioner :- Kanhaiya Lal And Ors. Respondent :- The State Of U.P And Anr. Petitioner Counsel :- Shravan Kumar Pandey Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Vinay Kumar Mathur,J.
Notice has been accepted by learned Addl. Government Advocate on behalf of respondent no.1.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Addl. Government Advocate and perused the record.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that a complaint case was filed by one Amarpal, who is brother-in-law of petitioner no.1. In a counterblast thereof, the instant complaint case has been filed against the petitioners and though there was no credible evidence available during the enquiry, learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shrawasti, vide the impugned order dated 26.9.2011 has summoned the petitioners under Sections 147/148/323/149/504/506/452 read with Section 149 I.P.C.
Learned Addl. Government Advocate has defended the impugned order.
On perusal of record, it cannot be said that no case against the petitioners is made out. Further, disputed questions of fact cannot be looked into by this court. In this view of the matter, the prayer for quashing the impugned order dated 26.9.2011 is refused.
However, it is provided that in case the petitioners appear before the court concerned within a period of one month from today and apply for bail, their bail application will be disposed of in accordance with law and in the light of the observations made in the case of Amrawati & anr. v. State of U.P., 2005 Crl.L.J. 755, affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. [(2009) 4 SCC 437] and reiterated by the Division Bench of this Court in Sheoraj Singh alias Chuttan v. State of U.P. & ors [2009 (65) ACC 781].
With these observations, this petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 8.6.2012 A.Nigam