JUDGMENT : Hon'ble Ali Zamin, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding of the Criminal Case No. 2543 of 2019 (State Vs. Laxmi Narayan Dubey and others), under Sections 147, 447, 323, 504, 506, 452 354(Kha) I.P.C. (arising out Case Crime No. 154 of 2018), Police Station Kapsethi, District Varanasi pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Varanasi. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant no.1 has filed a Civil Suit no.910 of 2017 (Laxmi Narayan Dubey Vs. Smt. Radhika and others) before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Varanasi on 11.07.2017. Opposite party no.2 has disclosed the incident of 23.10.2017 after filing the suit, in which time is missing. The same incident has been disclosed in first information report dated 11.12.2017. Third incident of near about 7.00 A.M. on 13.12.2017 has been disclosed and after about 9 months first information report on an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. has been lodged under Sections 147, 323, 504, 447, 511, 506, 450, 354(kha), 376 I.P.C. Laxmi Narayan Dubey is aged about 80 years old and other applicants Suresh Dubey, Diwakar Dubey, Prabhakar Dubey are sons of Laxmi Narayan Dubey and Shailesh Dubey & Ashish Dubbey are grandsons of Laxmi Narayan Dubey. He submits that only because of the civil suit first information report has been malafidely lodged against them and after investigation charge sheet has been submitted under Sections 147, 323, 504, 447, 506, 452, 354(Kha) I.P.C. 4. Learned A.G.A. opposes the application and submits that under Section 164 Cr.P.C. also the victim has supported the prosecution version. 5. 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 in exercise of power conferred under Section 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 R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Applicants have also opportunity for redressal of their grievance at appropriate stage before the trial court. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any ground to quash the proceeding of aforementioned case, therefore, the prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused. 7. However, in the interest of justice, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, then the bail application of the applicants be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. 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 Vs. State of U.P. For a period of 30 days from today or till disposal of the bail application, 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. 8. With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.