Rajesh Dayal Khare, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A.
(2.) THE present Code of Criminal Procedure petition has been filed for quashing the proceedings of Complaint Case No. 456 of 2010, under Sections , , , I.P.C., Police Station Mawana, District Meerut pending before learned Judicial Magistrate, Mawana, District Meerut and also for quashing the summoning order dated 14.07.2010 issued in the aforesaid case. It is contended by learned Counsel for the applicants that the present proceedings is nothing but a counter blast to the proceedings initiated by the applicants side against the opposite party No. 2. It is further contended that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.
(3.) 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 under Section Code of Criminal Procedure 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 v. State of Punjab : A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar v. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Mohd. Saraful Haq and Anr. (Para -10), 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicants have got right of discharge under Section or / or Code of Criminal Procedure as the case may be through a proper application for the said purpose and they are free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.;