Shashi Kant Gupta, J. - (1.) THIS application u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the summoning order dated 24.06.2013 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Badaun, in Complaint Case No. 154 of 2013, u/s. 498A, 323 I.P.C. & 3/4 D.P. Act against applicant No. 1 and u/s. 498A IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act against applicants No. 2 to 8, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Badaun. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
(2.) THE submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant 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 applicant 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 v. State of Punjab : AIR 1960 SC 866 and State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal : 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426 make the position of law in this regard clear.;