Court No. - 55 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 138 of 2010 Petitioner :- Raj Pal And Others Respondent :- State Of U.P.And Another Petitioner Counsel :- A.P. Tewari,S.S.Tripathi Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Vineet Saran,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. appearing for the
State and have perused the record.
The present petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the
summoning order dated 7.10.2009 passed by learned Special Judge (D.A.A.),
Budaun in Complaint Case No. 170 of 2008 Chandrapal vs. Rajpal and others
under sections 395, 397 I.P.C. Police station Rajpura, District Budaun,
pending in the court of Special Judge (D.A.A.) Budaun.
The contention of the counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the
applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a
malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain
documents and statements in support of his contention.
From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the
case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the
applicants. All the submissions made at the bar relate to disputed question of
fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482
Cr.P.C. At this stage only a prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the
law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab,
A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.)
426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu
Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10)
2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be
considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicants have got right of discharge
under Section 239 or 227/228 Cr.P.C., as the case may be, through a proper
application for the said purpose and they are free to take all the submissions in
the said discharge application before the Trial Court.
The prayer for quashing the summoning order is refused.
However, it is directed that the applicants shall appear and surrender before
the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, and their prayer
for bail shall be considered and decided 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 as well as judgement passed by Hon’ble Apex Court reported in
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 disposal of the application for grant of
bail, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However in case
the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid
period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed off.
Order Date :- 7.1.2010
dps