Rajiv Gupta, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A. G. A. for the State of U. P. and perused the material available on record.
(2.) Applicant has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 8.1.2016 passed by A.C.J.M., Court No.6, Varanasi in case No. 2505 of 2014, Anil Kumar Dubey Vs. Daya Ram, under section 420 I.P.C. P.S. Shivpur, District Varanasi as well as order dated 9.2.2018 passed by Additional District Judge, Court No. 14, Varanasi in criminal Revision No. 118 of 2017, Daya Ram Vs. State of U.P and others.
(3.) The contention of counsel for the applicant is that on the basis of the application moved under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. which has been treated as a complaint, the learned magistrate after recording the statements under section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. has summoned the applicant to face trial under section 420 I.P.C. vide order dt. 8.1.2016. Further against the order dated 8.1.2016, the applicant has preferred a revision being Criminal Revision No. 118 of 2017 which has also been dismissed vide order dated 9.2.2018. During the pendency of the aforesaid proceeding, the applicant has appeared before the Court and has also been granted bail. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present application has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents in support of his contention.;