Nattha Ram and another vs State of U.P.and another

A. Mateen, J.—Since both these petitions arise out of the same order, with the consent of the parties, they are being disposed of with this common order.

The present petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners praying therein for quashing summoning order dated 19.11.2005 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitapur and also chargesheet No. 62 of 2005 (Annexure Nos. 1 & 2). It is further prayed that order dated 5.5.2008 by means of which bailable warrants of arrest have been issued against the petitioners, be also quashed.

From the pleadings made in the petition, it seems that some matrimonial dispute is going on between one Smt. Suman Kumari and her husband Brijesh. This Court just to see that the dispute between the husband and wife is settled, ordered on 2.12.2008 to list the case on 16.12.2008 directing appearance of Sarwan, opposite party No. 2 along with his daughter Smt. Suman Kumari before this Court on said date. Since on 16.12.2008, neither Sarwan nor Smt. Suman Kumari appeared, as such, this Court directed on 28.1.2009 for taking steps for service on opposite party No. 2 and till the next date of listing, order dated 5, 5.2008 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sitapur issuing bailable warrants against the petitioners was kept in abeyance.

The prayer made in these petitions x are with respect to quashing chargesheet No. 62 of 2005 and also the bailable warrants against the petitioners. Neither Smt. Suman Kumari nor her husband Brijesh are parties before this Court. Since legal proceedings are going on before Court below, as such, in this petition under section 482 Cr.P.C, when the parties are not before the Court nor have been imp leaded in the petition, mediation cannot be done. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of B.S. Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another, 2003(46) ACC 779(SC) = 2003(51)ALR 222 = 2003 (5) AIC 42 (SC) the remedy available to the petitioners is to approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution wherein after recording acceptance of both the parties, the matter can be referred to the Mediation Centre. Apart from the above, in � the proceedings initiated against the petitioners by opposite party No. 2, since the petitioners did not care to appear before the Court concerned, as such, bailable warrants of arrest have been issued against them by the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitapur.

Considering the overall aspect of the matter, it seems just and proper to direct the petitioners to appear before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitapur and file their bonds before him who shall release them on bail and thereafter shall proceed with the case and shall try to dispose it of expeditiously in accordance with law.

Accordingly, it is directed that the petitioners shall appear before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitapur on 5th March, 2009 and till 5th March, 2009 execution of bailable warrants of arrest issued against the petitioners shall be kept in abeyance. It is clarified that if the petitioners fail to appear before the Court below on said date, the Court below shall proceed with the case in accordance with law.

With the above observations/directions, the petitions are finally disposed of.