Vijay And Others vs State Of U.P. And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 16774 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Vijay And Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 13 May, 2024

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:85913
 
Court No. - 89
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8750 of 2024
 

 
Applicant :- Vijay And Others
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Prakash Srivastava
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.
 

1. Heard learned counsel for applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the record.

2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the Complaint Case No.170 of 2023 (Ramchet Vs. Vijay and others) under Section 323, 452, 506 of IPC, Police Station Kalwari, District Basti including the summoning order dated 02.11.2023 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Third, Basti and the impugned judgment and order dated 18.01.2024 passed by Session Judge, Basti in Criminal Revision No.27 of 2024.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that civil suits are filed from both the sides. It is further submitted that no medical report is brought on record to support version of complaint. It is further submitted that without considering the grounds taken by the applicants in the revision the Session Judge, Basti illegally rejected the revision by impugned judgment and order dated 18.01.2024.

4. It is submitted that there is no evidence of involvement of applicants in the crime. No case is made out against the applicant. It is submitted that order impugned is perverse and suffers from manifesto error of law. Learned Magistrate without applying his mind summoned the accused for facing the trial.

5. Per contra learned Additional Government Advocate opposed the contentions made by learned counsel for the applicants and submitted that the summoning order has been passed after considering the evidence available on record, therefore, the present application deserves to be dismissed.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and after going through the available record, the prayer for quashing of the entire proceedings of aforesaid case, cognizance order dated 02.11.2023 and the impugned judgment and order dated 18.01.2024, is refused.

7. However, it is provided that in case the applicants apply for bail within a period of 30 days from today, their application for bail shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously in view of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825.

8 For a period of 30 days or till the applicants surrender and apply for bail, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

9. With the aforesaid observation, the application is disposed of.

Order Date :- 13.5.2024

Mohit