JUDGMENT Akhtar Husain Khan, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. 2. Present petition has been filed by petitioners Ram Khilawan, Lallai alias Lala, Jhuri and Putti Lal with prayer to quash order dated 21.4.2015 by means of which Judicial Magistrate, Purwa, district Unnao has taken cognizance on charge sheet no. 4 of 2015 submitted by police in Crime No. 638 of 2014, under Sections 354, 452, 504 and 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(x) SC/ST Act, police station Maurawa, district Unnao. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners contended that two eye witnesses, namely, Moti Lal son of Dallau and Ram Dei wife of Ram Dayal Lodh have filed affidavits before the Investigating officer in which they have deposed that they have been falsely made eye witnesses and accused persons have been falsely implicated. Learned counsel for petitioners further contended that even opposite party no. 2 Smt. Santoshi has given affidavit before Superintendent of Police, Unnao in which she has deposed that she could not identify any of the accused. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that in view of above facts, proceeding of case initiated on police report should be quashed. 5. Learned A.G.A. contended that the complainant as well as eye witnesses have supported version of prosecution in their statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and in view of statements of witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the investigating officer has rightly submitted charge sheet against the petitioners for offences under Sections 354, 452, 504 and 506 I.P.C. and Section 3 (1)(x) SC/ST Act. 6. Learned A.G.A. further contended that in view of statements of witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. by the investigating officer, affidavits filed by witnesses cannot be relied upon at this stage. 7. Admittedly, petitioners are named in the F.I.R. and version of F.I.R. has been supported by witnesses in their statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. 8. In view of facts mentioned above, there appears no illegality or irregularity either in the charge sheet submitted by police or cognizance taken by learned Magistrate. 9. In view of above, I am of the view that there is no justification for any interference at this stage under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 10. In view of facts mentioned above, there appears no illegality or irregularity either in the charge sheet submitted by police or cognizance taken by learned Magistrate. 9. In view of above, I am of the view that there is no justification for any interference at this stage under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 10. At this juncture, learned counsel for petitioners prayed for a direction under Section 483 Cr.P.C. for expeditious disposal of bail application in the light of principle laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Amrawati & Anr Vs. State of U.P. reported in [2004 (57) ALR 290] as affirmed by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in [2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC)]. 11. Learned A.G.A. has no objection to this prayer. A direction for expeditious disposal of bail application appears to be just. 12. In view of above, petition is hereby disposed of with direction to Magistrate concerned to make expeditious disposal of bail application moved by petitioners in the light of principle laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Amrawati & Anr Vs. State of U.P. (Supra) as affirmed by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. (Supra) subject to condition that petitioners shall appear before Magistrate concerned within one month from today and shall move bail application in accordance with law. No coercive measure shall be taken against the petitioners in the meantime. Time specified above shall not be extended further.