PUSHPA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. The applicants, by means of this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the proceedings of N.C.R. No. 390 of 2010, Case Crime No. 56 of 2011 (annexure no. 1), under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Barhalganj, district Gorakhpur and the order dated 2.7.2011 by which the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the aforesaid offences.

(2.) THE contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

(3.) IF further instructions are needed or if adjournment of the case on the date fixed for hearing becomes unavoidable, the Court may fix another date, and may also extend the earlier order granting interim bail, if it deems fit provided that the adjournment of hearing of the regular bail on one or more dates should not exceed a total period of one month. It will also be in the discretion of the Sessions/Special Judge concerned to consider granting interim bail pending consideration of the regular bail on similar terms as mentioned herein above when and if the applicants apply for bail before him.