Allahabad High Court
Shitala Prasad Gaud And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 2 May, 2019
Bench: Umesh Chandra Tripathi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 15497 of 2019
Applicant :- Shitala Prasad Gaud And 2 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. in opposition and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'Code') has been filed on behalf of the applicants with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 10.08.2018 passed by Additional Civil Judge (S.D.) II/ A.C.J.M. Jaunpur as well as entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1269/2018 (Geeta Devi Vs. Shitala Prasad and others), under Sections 323, 504, 506, 427, 452, 354 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Police Station - Kerakat, District -Jaunpur.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that from the material brought on the record, no offence is disclosed against the applicants. The present prosecution launched against the applicants is wholly mala fide as such, the present proceedings are sheer abuse of the process of the court.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer made and contention thereof raised by learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that material on record is sufficient for justifying initiation of proceedings and passing of the impugned summoning order by the court below.
From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case, it cannot be said at this stage that no offence is made out.
All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code.
Accordingly, the prayer for quashing the entire proceedings as well as the summoning order in the aforesaid case is refused.
However, none of the aforesaid offences alleged against applicants is punishable with imprisonment for more than seven years. All the materials relevant for disposal of bail application is available on record before trial court/court concerned.
In view of order passed by this Court in the case of Smt. Sakeena and another v. State of U.P. and another reported in 2018 (2) ACR 2190, it is directed that in case the applicants file their bail application, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided on the same day. If for any reason it is not possible to decide the regular bail application on the same day, then prayer for interim bail shall be considered and decided on the same day.
It is further directed that if applicants file an application under Section 245 Cr.P.C. for discharge at appropriate stage, the same shall be decided by the trial court by a reasoned and speaking order, strictly in accordance with law.
For a period of 60 days from today or till the applicants surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against them.
With the aforesaid observations/directions, the instant application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 2.5.2019
Radhika
