Amar Saran, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A. G. A.
(2.) This application has been filed for quashing a summoning order dated 27-7-2007 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Aligarh in Complaint Case No. 441 of 2007.
(3.) The first submission of the learned counsel for the applicant was that in the complaint no date of service of notice was mentioned and the same is in contravention of the decision of the Apex Court in hakti Travel and Tours v. State of Bihar and another, 2003 SCC (Cri) 1217 : (2001 AIR SCW 2307) and two decisions of this Court in Ravindra Singh Gugyani @ Sanju v. State of U. P. and others, 2007 (2) JIC, 457 (All) and Deepak Kumar and another v. State of U. P., 2007 (1) JIC, 907 (All). It may be noted that it has been clearly mentioned in the judgment of the Apex Court that in the assertion of the complaint, there is no averment that the notice has been served, but the said case did not require that the date of service be mentioned. In the decision in Ravindra Singh Gugyani @ Sanju's case again there was no assertion that the notice was served and on this ground relying on the decision of Shakti Travels and Tours, Hon'ble R. K. Rastogi, J., issued notice only. In the decision of Deepak Kumar and another passed by Hon'ble Vinod Prasad, J., it has been clarified that the notice had been sent by courier and it had not been sent by registered post.;