- (1.) K. N. Ojha, J. Heard Sri S. P. Singh Parmar, learned Counsel for the applicants, learned A. G. A. and Sri S. K. Shukla, learned Counsel for OP No. 2 and have gone through the record.
(2.) INSTANT application under Section 482 Cr. P. C. has been moved to set aside order dated 2-4-2005 passed by ACJM Bhadohi, in Criminal Case No. 1632 of 2005, whereby the applicants were summoned to face trial under Sections 323, 504 I. P. C. police station Gopiganj, District Sant Ravidas Nagar, and order dated 15-10-2005 passed by learned C. J. M. whereby personal appearance of the applicants is being compelled through bailable warrant. It has been submitted by learned Counsel for the applicant that parties are residents of one and the same village Bhavanipur, police station Gopiganj, District Sant Ravidas Nagar. A dispute took place and NCR was gor registered at the police station by both the parties and both the parties moved application under Section 155 (2) Cr. P. C. to seek permission of the learned Magistrate for investigation in the case as the NCR was got lodged by both the parties under bailable offences. The application of the OP No. 3 was allowed but the application moved by the applicants under Section 155 (2) Cr. P. C. was rejected. Thereafter charge-sheet was submitted in this case and the applicants were summoned. When they did not appear order has been passed for issue of non-bailable warrant against the applicants. It has been submitted by the learned Counsel for the applicants that the injuries of more gravity was caused on the side of the applicants still the application of the applicants under Section 155 (2) was rejected while the application of the O. P. No. 2 was allowed. It may be observed that the order passed in the cross case cannot be a ground to quashed the charge-sheet submitted in the case. It has been submitted that revision was preferred against the order rejecting the application under Section 155 (2) Cr. P. C. and it is the revisional Court which has to decide the validity of the order and may hold that the order was valid or not, but any order passed in the cross case cannot be taken to be sufficient ground to quash the charge-sheet.
(3.) THE learned Counsel for the applicants has further submitted that when NCR was got registered, the names of the witnesses were not mentioned and injury report was also not filed. Annexure No. 6 is the copy of injury report of Brahmdev son of Lalji, which shows that as many as four injuries were caused including contusion on head. It cannot be said that it is a case of no injury and still charge-sheet has been filed. It is to be appreciated at the final stage as to which of the party was aggressor and whether the injuries could be believed or not. THE minor nature of injuries cannot be taken to be ground to quash the charge-sheet. In the opinion of this Court there is no sufficient ground to quash the charge-sheet submitted in this case. However, it may be observed that the applicants Sarda Prasad and Lallan @ Ashish Kumar are facing trial under bailable offences under Sections 323, 504 I. P. C. , therefore, they will surrender in the Court below concerned within two weeks from today. They may move bail application and their bail application will be disposed of in accordance with law on the condition they file bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned. It is further observed that during pendency of the bail application the applicants will not be sent to jail. The application under Section 482 Cr. P. C. is disposed of finally. Appeal rejected. .;