Arjun Ram Rawat And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another
2015 Latest Caselaw 1950 ALL

Citation : 2015 Latest Caselaw 1950 ALL
Judgement Date : 24 August, 2015

Allahabad High Court

Arjun Ram Rawat And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 24 August, 2015

Bench: Pankaj Naqvi




HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 49
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 24876 of 2015
 

 
Applicant :- Arjun Ram Rawat And Another
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Sarvesh Kumar
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the summoning order dated 15.5.2013 in Complaint Case Crime No. 763 of 2012, under Sections 494, 109 IPC, P.S.- Nonahra, District Ghazipur, pending in the court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghazipur.

The contention of the counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants 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.

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said 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 under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. The disputed defence cannot be considered at this stage.

The prayer claimed is refused. The application is dismissed.

However, learned Magistrate, while considering the bail application of applicant no.2, who is a lady, shall keep into the consideration the first Proviso appended to Section 437 Cr.P.C.

Order Date :- 24.8.2015

Ashish Pd.