Allahabad High Court
Sarita (Smt.) And 4 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 9 July, 2019
Bench: Om Prakash-Vii
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 73
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 725 of 2019
Applicant :- Sarita (Smt.) And 4 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Verma
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Beerendra Singh Pal
Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings as well as summoning order dated 8.12.2016 as well as the order of NBW dated 24.9.2018 passed in Case No.723 of 2018, arising out of Complaint Case No.239 of 2016 (Raju Balmiki vs. Smt. Sarita & others) under sections 494, 497, 468, 109 I.P.C. PS. Achhalda, District Auraiya, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate/Civil Judge (JD), Auraiya. Further prayer has been made to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the complainant and the learned AGA appearing for the State.
In this case mediation was failed as the applicant did not appear before the Mediation Centre but the opposite party no.2 was present on the relevant date.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that the summoning order passed by Magistrate concerned is illegal and without applying judicial mind. Concerned Magistrate did not consider the evidence on record in right perspective. Order issuing non bailable warrant against the applicants is also illegal.
On the other hand, learned AGA and learned counsel for the complainant has argued that the opposite no.2 was present before the Mediation Centre. Since the applicant did not appear, the mediation process could not be started. A prima facie offence is made out against the applicants. There is sufficient evidence to proceed with the trial.
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 from the material available on record it cannot be said that no prima facie case is made out against the applicants. Further, to adjudicate/decide the pleas raised before this Court leading of evidence would be required, which can appropriately be done before the court concerned at the appropriate stage. Hence, the prayer made in the present application is refused.
In the last, learned counsel has urged that direction for expeditious disposal of bail application of the applicants be given.
Hence, it is observed 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 to surrender before the court concerned.
With the above observations, the application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 9.7.2019
Rk
