Allahabad High Court
Sabir Ali And 7 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 1 August, 2019
Bench: Om Prakash-Vii
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 73
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 27855 of 2019
Applicant :- Sabir Ali And 7 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- S. A. Khan
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 29.05.2019 passed by Civil Judge S.D / A.C.J.M. Sonbhadra in Complaint Case No. 243 of 2017 (Hakimuddin Vs. Sabir Ali and others), under Sections 323, 452, 504 IPC, Police Station Pannuganj, District - Sonbhadra. 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 present complaint was filed showing the same date of offence as was disclosed in the FIR lodged on part of the applicant no. 6. Summoning order passed in the matter is illegal. The impugned order suffers from illegality and infirmity.
On the other hand, learned AGA has submitted that applicants have been summoned on the basis of the statements recorded under Sections 200 Cr.P.C. and 202 Cr.P.C.. The impugned order does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity.
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 thirty days from today, the same shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law. For a period of thirty days from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.
It is made clear that no further time shall be allowed to the applicants for surrender before the court concerned.
With the above observations, the application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 1.8.2019//Sanjeet
