ZARGAM BEG AND OTHERS Vs. ASHFAQ HUSAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Perused the impugned summoning order summoning the revisionist Zargam Beg Anjuman Beg, Jawar and Pappoo for offences* under Sections 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. They wanted to be heard at the summoning stage in a complaint case. In view of Supreme Court law referred to in the impugned order the Magistrate rightly refused to hear them. Once the revisionist had themselves put in appearance want of taking steps was immaterial. At any rate, the non bailable warrants was issued only after non-appearance of the accused of the.case. I see no reason to interfere with the impugned order. But revisionist should be given due facility for contesting the case against them. Revisionist Smt. Anjuman Beg, being a lady, may appear before the Magistrate concerned through her counsel. Zargam Beg, Jawar and Pappoo may appear before the Magistrate concerned in person. On their appearance they shall not be taken into custody, but shall be required only to furnish bonds with or without sureties for their appearance on future dates. Revisionist shall be at liberty to claim discharge under Sec. 245 (2) Crimial P.C. even before evidence under Sec. 244 is recorded. If any such application for discharge is filed the Magistrate shall dispose the same before proceeding further. Execution of warrant against revisionist in case No. 1482 of 1989 Ashfaq Husain Vs. Zargam Beg and others pending in the Court of C. J. M. Budaun under Sec. 323/506 is stayed for six weeks. During this period revisionist may appear before the Magistrate concerned as directed above.

(2.) Revision is disposed of finally accordingly. Revision disposed of.