Allahabad High Court
Pramod Kumar Kharwar And Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 25 November, 2022
Author: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
Bench: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 84 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 23931 of 2012 Applicant :- Pramod Kumar Kharwar And Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Nikhil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt.Advocate,B.R. Sharma,Prem Chandra Srivastava Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
1. The applicants are accused in Complaint Case No. 3048 of 2011, under Sections 147, 323, 427, 504, 506 IPC, pending before Civil Judge (Junior Division)/ Judicial Magistrate, Maharajganj. They were summoned by an order passed under Section 204 Cr.P.C. which was challenged before this Court in Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 10916 of 2011. Said application was disposed of vide order dated 06.04.2011 with certain directions, which are mentioned hereinafter:
"Considering the facts, circumstances of the case and submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants and the learned AGA, it is directed that in case the applicants move the application under section 245(2) Cr.P.C. before the court concerned, through their counsel within 30 days from today, the same shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously in accordance with the provisions of law.
Till the disposal of that application, no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicants."
2. In pursuance of above order, applicants moved application under Section 245(2) Cr.P.C., however, the same was rejected by order dated 07.06.2012 on the ground that after summoning order there was no material to come to the conclusion that charges against applicants were groundless. Meanwhile, Court below issued fresh summons vide order dated 13.08.2010. Both orders are impugned in present application.
3. Sri Nikhil Kumar, learned counsel for applicants, fairly submits that applicants have still opportunity to cross-examine the complainant and other witnesses under Section 244 Cr.P.C. and have further liberty to file application under Section 245(1) Cr.P.C. for discharge.
4. None appeared on behalf of Opposite Party No. 2. Learned AGA appearing for State, submits that argument of counsel for applicants is legally correct.
5. In view of above, without interfering with impugned order, Trial Court is directed to proceed with case and in case after evidence is over under Section 244 Cr.P.C. an application for discharge is filed by applicants under Section 245(1) Cr.P.C., the same shall be considered in accordance with law and on the basis of outcome of said application, Trial Court shall proceed further.
6. With aforesaid direction, the application is disposed of.
7. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
8. The applicants shall appear before Trial Court within three weeks from today and file bail application, which shall be considered in accordance with law taking note of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2021) 10 SCC 773.
Order Date :- 25.11.2022 AK