The court's decision emphasized the option for the applicants to move an application under Section 245 Cr.P.C. for discharge, highlighting the procedural aspect of the case.

Arvind Kumar Mishra-I, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State.

2. By means of the instant application, the applicants have prayed for qaushment of the entire proceeding and the summoning order dated 02.07.2014 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Bareilly, in Complaint Case No.74 of 2014 Smt. Suhana Vs. Saiful Islam and others, under Sections 406, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Baradari, District Bareilly.

3. Contention has been raised on behalf of the applicants to the extent that the proceedings initiated against the applicants are in counterblast to the proceedings launched against father of the opposite party no.2 who is allegedly involved in murder of the applicants' brother and son respectively. The complainant has made vague and imaginary statement for bringing the case of the applicants within the purview of penal law. The complaint instituted by the opposite party no.2 is nothing but sheer misuse of the process of the Court.

4. Learned AGA has submitted that since the summoning order impugned was passed pursuant to the complaint and statement of the complainant and witnesses recorded under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. respectively, therefore, the same cannot be said to be vitiated either on the facts or law for the time being. Thus, so far as the summoning order dated 02.07.2014 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Bareilly, in Complaint Case No.74 of 2014 Smt. Suhana Vs. Saiful Islam and others, under Sections 406, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Baradari, District Bareilly, is concerned, the same needs no interference by this Court for the reason that the factual aspect so urged and pressed before this Court may be urged before the lower court. The applicant may, if so wish, move an appropriate application under Section 245 Cr.P.C. for discharge.

5. Considered the above submissions. No good ground is made out for quashment of the impugned proceeding and summoning order is made out. Accordingly, the prayer for quashment of the impugned proceedings and the summoning order is refused.

6. However, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, it is provided that in case the applicants move an application under Section 245 Cr.P.C. within 30 days from today, the same shall be considered and disposed of by the court below after affording an opportunity of hearing to all concerned.

7. For a period of thirty days from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.

It is made clear that in the event no such application is moved within the time prescribed above, this order will be of no avail to the applicants.

With the above direction, the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of.