Allahabad High Court
Mukesh And 3 Others 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. - 28460 of 2019
Applicant :- Mukesh And 3 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Kumar Sharma
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 proceeding of Complaint Case No. 1160 of 2019, Nirvikar Versus Brij Mohan and others under sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Makkhanpur, District Firozabad including impugned summoning order dated 24.05.2019 passed by the learned Civil Judge (SD)/F.T.C./A.C.J.M., Firozsabad.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that impugned complaint has been filed making false and baseless allegations and that no one has sustained any injury in the alleged incident. It was further pointed out that earlier applicant no.1 has lodged a Complaint Case No. 969 of 2015 against the respondent no.2 and in that case the respondent no.2 was summoned vide order dated 21.11.2015, under sections 323, 354, 504, 506 I.P.C. and that respondent no.2 was pressurizing the applicants to withdraw that case, as the applicants did not withdraw the said case, the respondent no.2 has filed impugned complaint.
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 30 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 30 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 shall be taken against them.
With the aforesaid direction, the application is disposed off finally.
Order Date :- 1.8.2019
T.S.
