Karuna Nand Bajpayee, J. - (1.) THIS application u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by applicants Satpal Verma, Smt. Jaggo Devi and Smt. Neelam for quashing the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 270 of 2010 (Smt. Poonam Devi Vs. Sandeep Verma and others) u/s. 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. -Nanauta, District Saharanpur in pursuance of summoning order dated 27.05.2010 pending in the court of Additional civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Deoband, District Saharanpur. Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record
(2.) THE submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants involve several intricate factual details and many disputed questions of fact related to the case. False implication due to malafide intention has been pleaded. By invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this court the applicants cannot persuade the court to have a pre trial before the actual trial begins. The submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants call for adjudication on pure questions of fact and while doing so even the submissions made on points of law can also be appropriately gone into by the trial court in this case.
(3.) THE quashing of the complaint can also be done only if it does not disclose any offence or if there is any legal bar which prohibits the proceedings on its basis. The Apex Court decisions in R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab : AIR 1960 SC 866 and State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal : 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426 make the position of law in this regard clear.;