Smt. Ram Guni And 3 Others v. State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko

Applicant :- Smt. Ram Guni And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Askari Husain Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

Heard Sri Askari Husain, learned counsel for applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Anurendra Nath Mishra, learned counsel for private respondents.

The applicants are accused in the Complaint Case No. 2474 of 2022, under Section 452, 379, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. Police Station Kotwali, District Hardoi and had approached this Court on previous occasion assailing the summoning order by filing an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. being Application U/S 482 No. 851 of 2023 which was disposed of by thi sCorut by order dated 01.02.2023 giving liberty to the applicants to move an application for discharge and an interim protection was also granted to them during the prieod of consideration of the said application.

Learned counsel for applicants submits that the application for discharge has been rejected by thr Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hardoi by means of order dated 19.11.2022 which has been assailed in the present case. At the sate of considering the application for discharge, the trial court has duly considered the statements of the complainant under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. where there were specific allegations with regard to the applicants that they were assailed them and also taking away jewellery and cash form the complainant. Even the witnesses adduced by the complainant had supported the case of the prosecution.

The trial court further looking into the fact that there were no substantial material placed by the accused at the stage of discharge which could indicate that they were not involved in the said incident and accordingly has rejected the application.

This Court has perused the application of discharge and also heard learned counsel for parties and finds that except reiteration of the grounds raised before the trial court no other ground has been raised. On due consideration of the material on record as ell as rival submissions made in this regard, this Court finds no infirmity in the impugned order of discharge dated 19.11.2024. The trial court has duly considered the material available on record including the statement under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and does not find any infirmity in the same.

Learned counsel for applicants on the other hand has submitted that present dispute is a matrimonial dispute that the accused are relatives of one Neelam who was married to son of respondent No. 2. Neelam has lodged a complaint under Section 498A of Cr.P.C. against the respondent No. 2 and her other relatives including her husband and also proceedings under Section 12 of Domestic Violence Act. While on the other hand, respondents have lodged instant complaint against the applicants on the basis of which the trial is proceeding.

He further submits that applicants are ready and willing to participate in the proceedings but such protection may be granted to them till final disposal of the bail application.

Accordingly, it is provided that in case applicants appear before the trial court within next ten days and move appropriate application for bail, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants till consideration of the said application by the trial court.

It is made clear in case applicants do not move appropriate application within the time prescribed by this Court, the benefit of this order shall not be available to them.

In view of the aforesaid observations / directions, the present application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. stands disposed of. (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 27.3.2025 Ravi/ RAVI SHANKAR SRIVASTAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench