Rajesh Dayal Khare, J.@mdashHeard learned Counsel for the applicants and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. Another Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.01.1995 had issued notice to the opposite party No. 2 and in the meantime further proceedings of Case No. 756 of 1994 (State v. Shrawan Kumar), under Sections 467, 468, 420, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Chetganj, District Varanasi, pending before learned IInd Additional Chief Judicial, Varanasi.
3. Till date no counter affidavit has been filed.
4. The present 482 Cr.P.C. petition has been filed for quashing the proceedings of Case No. 756 of 1994 (State v. Shrawan Kumar), under Sections 467, 468, 420, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Chetganj, District Varanasi, pending before learned IInd Additional Chief Judicial, Varanasi.
5. Learned Counsel for the applicants has contended 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 in support of his contention. It is further next contended that no offence under the provisions of I.P.C. is made out against the applicants and at best the proceedings u/s 138 of Negotiable Instruments could have been drawn against the applicants. It is also argued that the only allegations against the applicants are that the cheque issued by the applicants with regard to the Bank where no such account exists.
6. 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 u/s 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
7. The prayer for quashing the proceedings is refused.
8. Interim order dated 13.01.1995 is hereby vacated.
9. However, it is directed that the applicants shall appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail 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 Anr. v. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as Judgment passed by Hon''ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh v. 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.
10. With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed off.
