RAJESH DAYAL KHARE,J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
(2.) THE present petition under section 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1021A of 2009 (State v. Brij lal and others), under sec­tions 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Karari, District Kaushambi, pending before learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Dis­trict Kaushambi as well as for quashing of the summoning prder dated 24.9.2009 is­sued in the aforesaid case against the ap­plicants. It is contended by learned Counsel for the applicants that charged sections are bailable sections and the learned Magis­trate may pass an order taking cognizance if he so desires by proceeding under Chap­ter XV of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is further contended that the order im­pugned has been challenged and reliance has been placed to explanation 2(d) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is next con­tended that no permission was taken under section 155(2), Cr.P.C. and charge-sheet has been submitted in non-cognizable of­fence. Learned Counsel for the applicants has relied upon a Judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in M/s Eicher Tractor Ltd. and others v. Harihar Singh and another, 2009 (64) ACC 296, as well as another reported Judgment of this Court in Awadesh Kumar and others v. State of U.P. and others, 2008 (61) ACC 54 (All), in support of his contention.
(3.) LEARNED A.G.A. has stated that no useful purpose would be served in issuing notice to the opposite party No. 2 as it will only delay the proceedings of the present case.;