Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1591 (ALL)

Sabira Begum @ Chanda Begum v. State of U. P. Thur. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home

2015-06-22

AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN

body2015
JUDGMENT Akhtar Husain Khan, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Government Advocate. 2. Present petition has been filed by petitioners Sabira Begum alias Chanda Begum and Hina Kausar under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with prayer to quash entire proceedings initiated in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (C.B.I./A.P.), Lucknow in Criminal Case No. 129 of 2014 against the petitioners along with order under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. as well as order under Section 204 Cr.P.C. passed by the Court below. 3. The petitioners are named in the complaint. After having recorded statements under Sections 200 & 202 Cr.P.C., the learned Magistrate has passed impuged order dated 28.5.2015 summoning petitioners Sabira Begum alias Chanda Begum and Hina Kausar for offences under Sections 498A, 406, 504, 506, 468 IPC. 3. There appears no illegality or irregularity in the impugned summoning order at this stage. Moreover, the petitioners have opportunity to plead their plea of discharge before the Magistrate concerned, who is competent to pass appropriate order under Section 245 (2) Cr.P.C. 4. In view of above, I found no justification for interference under Section 482 Cr.P.C. at this stage. The present petition moved under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed. 5. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners prayed for a direction for expeditious disposal of bail application moved by the petitioners in the light of principle laid down by seven Judges Bench of this Court in the case of Amrawati & Anr. vs. State of U.P. reported in [2004 (57) ALR. 290, which has been affirmed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh vs. State of U.P. reported in [2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC)]. A direction for expeditious disposal of bail application moved by the petitioners appears to be justified. 6. In view of above, learned Magistrate concerned is directed to make expeditious disposal of bail application, or applications, moved by the petitioners in the light of principle laid down in the case of Amrawati & Anr. vs. State of U.P. (Supra) which has been affirmed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh vs. State of U.P. (Supra), subject to condition that the petitioners shall appear before the learned Magistrate concerned within one month from today and move application for bail in accordance with law. In the meantime, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners. In the meantime, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners. Time specified above shall not be extended further.