Karuna Nand Bajpayee, J. - (1.) The present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred on behalf of applicants Ashok and Ravindra seeking the quashing of impugned order dated 14.07.2017 whereby application moved on behalf of applicants u/s 245 Cr.P.C. has been rejected and order dated 10.11.2017 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baghpat in Complaint Case No.5018 of 2015 (Smt. Subhasana vs. Pankaj and others), u/s 302 I.P.C., Police Station-Doghat, District-Baghpat whereby application moved u/s 323 Cr.P.C. seeking committal of the case to the court of Sessions has also been rejected and non bailable warrant has been issued against the applicant.
(2.) Heard learned counsel for the applicants.
(3.) Submission of counsel for the applicants is that on earlier point of time the accused-applicants had approached the High Court wherein another bench of this Court vide its order dated 23.6.2017 had given the finding that at that stage it could not be said that no offence was made out against the applicants and all the submissions raised by the counsel related to disputed questions of fact but the Court had given the liberty to move a discharge application, if the applicants so desired, through counsel within two weeks. Further submission is that later on the applicants had moved an application dated 07.07.2017 before the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate and sought discharge under Section-245 Cr.P.C. It has been argued that this application has been wrongly rejected by the court below by passing impugned order dated 14.7.2017. Counsel has tried to enter into the merits of the case and touched upon the aspects which relate to the appreciation of evidence and with regard to judging the credibility of witnesses and the value of the statements of different witnesses and the material available on record.;