HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL C-482 NO. 987 OF 2006 1. Ganesh Dutt Badhani, S/o Shri Nanda Ballabh Badhani, 2. Smt. Geeta, wife of Shri Ganesh Dutt Badhani, Both are resident of Uttam Basti, Bhopatwala, Haridwar. 3. Raghunath Khanna, S/o Shri Bishwanath Khanna, R/o Durga Nagar Bhopatwala, Haridwar. .....................Applicants. Vs. 1. State of Uttaranchal. 2. Jogendra Chaudhary, S/o Shri Doman Chaudhary, R/o Uttam Basti Bhopatwala, Haridwar. ...................Opp. Parties. Hon’ble Rajesh Tandon, J. Heard Sri P.S. Rawat, counsel for the applicants and A.G.A. for the State. 2. By the present application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicant has prayed for quashing the summoning order dated 6th October, 2006 issued by the Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar in Complaint Case No. 1948 of 2006 under Section 323/452/504/506 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. On the complaint having been filed, statements under Section 200 and 202 were recorded and thereafter the order for summoning the applicant has been passed. 4. In Medchl Chemicals and Pharma (P) Ltd. v. Biological E. Ltd. and others (2003) 3 SCC 269, the Apex Court has been observed as under: “19. Considering the factual aspect of the matter, we unhesitatingly state, however, that the issue involved in the matter under consideration is not a case in which the criminal trial should have been short- circuited. We, thus, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order of the high Court and restore the complaint. The learned trial Magistrate shall proceed with the complaint and dispose of the same in accordance with the law with utmost expedition. Be it clarified however that observations as above in this judgment be not taken as an expression of any opinion of ours.” 8. So far as the complaint case in Smt. Husna and others v. State of U.P. and others [2006 (56) ACC 659], it has been held as under: “7. The petition is finally disposed of with the direction to the petitioners to appear before the Court concerned within 15 days of passing of this order and if they do so, the Court will permit them to file appearance bonds to his satisfaction for their regular appearance in the case.” 6. Since the matter arises out of the complaint, therefore, let the applicants be released on furnishing personal bonds to the satisfaction of the Magistrate concerned for his regular appearance in the case. 7. Subject to the observations made above, application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed. (Rajesh Tandon, J.) 5th December, 2006 Rathour