JUDGMENT Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Tripathi, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding of Compliant Case No. 3229 of 2011 under Sections 379, 504 I.P.C. P.S. Diyoriya Kalan, District Pilibhit. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants contended that on the basis of false allegation the impugned complaint has been filed. The applicant no.1 was not present at the time of incident, however he has also been implicated in the present case. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer of the applicants. 5. Considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. From perusal of the complaint, it cannot be said at this stage that no offence is made out. The disputed question of facts are required to be examined by the court concerned at an appropriate stage in accordance with law while considering the discharge application or before framing charges, because it is responsibility of the Magistrate concerned to scrutinize the material very carefully, so that any innocent person is not prosecuted and held guilty. Hence, no interference is required at this initial stage u/s 482 Cr.P.C. 6. Without expressing any opinion on merit, in view of the facts, if the applicants appear before the court concerned within four weeks and apply for bail, it is expected that the same will be considered and disposed off, expeditiously, in accordance with law, in view of the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Amarawati and another Vs. State of U.P., reported in 2004(57) ALR-390 and by the Apex Court in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. reported in 2009 (4) SCC 437 , after giving opportunity to public prosecutor. If the bail application could not be decided on the same day then applicants may be released on interim bail till disposal of the bail application. 7. With these observations, present application filed under section 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed off.