Allahabad High Court
Ramesh Chand And 2 Ors vs State Of U.P. And Another on 1 August, 2019
Bench: Raj Beer Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 83
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28498 of 2019
Applicant :- Ramesh Chand And 2 Ors
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Singh,Dharmendra Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,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 20.12.2018 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 12, Agra as well as entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 953 of 2018, Dinesh Kardam Vs. Ramesh Chand and others, under sections 323,504,506 I.P.C., Police Station New Agra, District Agra, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No.12, Agra.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that impugned complaint has been filed making false and baseless allegations. It was pointed out that earlier son of applicant no.1 namely Raju and daughter of respondent no.2 namely Mini Kardam have solemnized their marriage and that opposite party no.2 was interfering in their peaceful married life. It was stated that earlier first information report vide Case Crime No.539 of 2018 was lodged by son of respondent no.2 against the son of applicant no.1 and after investigation, in that case police have submitted final report. It was submitted that after acceptance of the final report, impugned complaint has been filed against the applicants just to harass them and that no prima facie case is made out against the applicants.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer.
From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the fact of the case at this stage, it cannot be said that prima facie no case is made out against the applicants. All the submissions made at the Bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in jurisdiction of Section 482 Cr. P.C. It is well settled that at this stage only prime case is to be seen. Considering the law laid down by Apex Court in the case of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283, material on record and considering the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant, no case for quashing of the proceeding is made out.
The prayer for quashing as made above is hereby refused.
However, it is directed that in case applicants appear and surrender before the courts below within 45 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously on its own merits 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 and judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
For a period of 45 days from today or till the applicants surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants does not appear before the Courts below within the aforesaid period, coercive action may be taken against them in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid direction, the application is disposed off finally.
Order Date :- 1.8.2019
T.S.
