- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A. G. A. for the State.
(2.) This application has been filed for quashing the charge sheet No. 8/2005 dated 23-1-2005 arnd also the order dated 15-2- 2005 whereby cognizance was taken and summons under Section 424 I. P. C. has been issued against the applicants in case crime No. 474 of 2004 Police Station Brindava Mathura. The second prayer is that for quashing the order dated 17-2-2005 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura refusing to release the goods loaded in the Truck No. HR-38D/8271, which was taken into custody on 12-12-2004 in connection with case crime No. 474 of 2004 under Sections 332, 353, 419. 420, 481, 482, 467, 468, 120-B I. P. C. and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Brindavan, District Mathura. This order has been confirmed in revision by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mathura in criminal revision No. 83 of 2005 vide judgment dated 18- 8-2005.
(3.) I have gone through the First Information Report and charge sheet. I do not find it a fit case for quashing the charge sheet and impugned order. A bare reading of the documents, prima facie makes out a case against the applicants. In the circumstances, the applicants are permitted to appear through counsel and claim discharge at the appropriate stage, and the Courts below shall decide the said application, in accordance with law, after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties, by a reasoned order. However, in case the applicants appear within fifteen days from today and move an exemption application under section 205/317 Cr. P. C., (as the case may be) personal appearance of the applicants shall not be compelled during pendency of the application for discharge moved on behalf of the applicants. The Court shall take an undertaking from the applicants that they will appear on such dates as and when the Court requires their presence. Till the application for discharge is finally decided, no coercive measures shall be taken against them.;