Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:60238 Court No. - 87 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 34704 of 2024 Applicant :- Divesh Pratap Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Rao Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. 2. The present application has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer for quashing the order dated 28.8.2024 passed by Sessions Judge, Kushinagar at Padrauna in Criminal Revision No.16 of 2024 (Divesh Pratap Singh vs. State of U.P. and another) under Section 323, 504 IPC, Police Station Patherwa, District Kushinagar and the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 2850 of 2020 (Ratna Rao Vs. Brijbhushan Rao and others) and the order dated 1.2.2021 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasya, Kushinagar. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is maternal uncle of the complainant, Ratna Rao, opposite party no.2 and he has no concern with her matrimonial life. He further submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case just to pressurize and harass him, in fact, no such incident has taken place. The applicant has never committed any offence as alleged against him. He further submits that no offences against the applicant is disclosed and the court below has utterly failed to consider as no prima facie case is made out against the applicant. He also pointed out certain documents in support of his contention. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently oppose the present application and contend that in the F.I.R. the allegation has been made out against the applicant. He further submits that the Court below has right to summon the applicant and no interference is required by this Court in the impugned order 1.2.2021 and the proceedings of the trial case. 5. From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. All the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918, R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicants have got a right of discharge before the court below and they are free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the trial court. 6. The prayer for quashing the @@@ and the entire proceedings of the above mentioned case is hereby refused. 7. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicants submitted that directions may be given to the court below to consider the bail application of the applicants in view of the judgment in the matter of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2021 SCC Online SC 922. 8. In the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court laid down the guidelines for deciding of the bail application. For that purpose, the cases have been divided under four categories. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that the trial courts and the High Courts will keep in mind the aforesaid guidelines, while considering the bail application. This Court has no doubt, that as and when, the applicants approach the trial court for bail, the trial court shall definitely follow the directions given in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (supra). 9. However, considering the nature of the allegations and submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants, it is directed that in case the applicants appear and surrender before the court concerned and apply for bail, the same shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously by the courts below in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (supra). 10. With the above directions, this application u/s 482 is disposed of finally. Order Date :- 22.4.2025 Kumar Manish Digitally signed by :- MANISH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad