Allahabad High Court
Gurmeet Singh vs State Of U.P. Thur. Addl. C.J.M., ... on 23 July, 2010
Court No. - 5 Case :- U/S 482/378/407 No. - 2968 of 2010 Petitioner :- Gurmeet Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thur. Addl. C.J.M., Lakhimpur Kheri & Another Petitioner Counsel :- Shailendra Kumar Singh Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Vedpal,J.
This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the summoning order dated 23.3.2010 as well as for quashing of the proceedings of Complaint Case No. 910/2010 under Section 494 I.P.C.,Police Station Sampurna Nagar, district Kheri.
Notice on behalf of opposite party no. 1 has been accepted by the learned AGA.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. and perused the record of the case.
Notice against opposite party no. 2 is dispensed with.
It reveals from the perusal of the record that statements under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. were recorded at length by the court below and statement of complainant under Section 200 Cr.P.C. stands corroborated with the statement of witnesses recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C. Considering the sufficient material , learned trial court summoned the accused to face trial. It is settled law that inherent power to quash the proceedings should not be exercised to stifle the legitimate prosecution. It would be erroneous to assess the reliability of the witnesses at this stage. A perusal of the record prima facie discloses the commission of offence. There is nothing on record to show that proceeding is malafide, frivolous or vexatious. In these circumstances there appears no sufficient ground to interfere in the matter and the progress of the trial before the court below.
In the end, learned counsel for the petitioner confines his prayer for expeditious disposal of the bail application in case the applicant surrenders before the court below. No doubt it is the right of every one that his bail application be disposed of expeditiously.
It is, therefore, provided that if the petitioner surrenders before the court below within ten days and moves an application for bail, the same shall be considered and disposed of by the courts below expeditiously in the light of the law laid down by Full Bench of this Court in case of Smt. Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2005 CBC page 705.
With the aforesaid observations, the petition is disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 23.7.2010/Tripathi