Court No. - 5 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19554 of 2010 Petitioner :- Sohan Lal And Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others Petitioner Counsel :- Radha Krishna Yadav Respondent Counsel :- Govt.Advocate Hon'ble Rajesh Dayal Khare,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. petition has been filed for quashing the proceedings
of Complaint Case No. 3112 of 2009, under Sections 147, 323, 452, 504, 506
I.P.C., pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra as
well as for quashing the summoning order dated 19.01.2010 issued in the
aforesaid case.
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.It is further contended
that the dispute is purely of civil nature which has been dragged into criminal
prosecution of the applicants. It is next contended that the applicants no. 9, 10
and 11 are ladies, therefore, their bail application be considered on the same
day, if possible by the Court below.
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 submission made at the bar relates to the disputed question
of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482
Cr.P.C. At this stage only 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 245(2) Cr.P.C., 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 proceedings as well as 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, then the bail
application of the applicants no. 9,10 and 11 who are ladies, be considered
and disposed off on the same day, if possible and for remaining applicants
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 whichever is earlier, 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 :- 15.6.2010
S.Ali