IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL C-482 No. 772 of 2010 Sanjay Dhodi and others ………..Applicants Versus State of Uttarakhand and another …..Respondents. Present: Mr. Vinod Sharma, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. Nandan Arya, AGA for the State of Uttarakhand. Date of Decision: 09.09.2010 Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J(Oral) This criminal misc. application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants challenging the summoning order dated 12.7.2010 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate on a complaint filed under Sections 342, 323, 325, 504, 506 IPC. Though this is a complaint case assistance was called from the learned AGA. Learned AGA has pointed out that it is not a simple case of complaint under Sections 342, 323, 325, 504, 506 IPC and there have also been injuries on the complainant. This fact that the complainant has sustained injuries has also been reflected in the summoning order. Learned counsel for the applicants Mr. Vinod Sharma, however, states that this complaint is nothing but a counter blast to the earlier FIR filed by applicant no.1 against the complainant. Be that as it may, this is not a proper forum to go into this aspect as to whether this is a counter blast or not. What is before this Court is the fact that the complainant had sustained injuries inasmuch as his tooth was broken. Prima facie this Court is of considered view that a summoning order and the cognizance taken by the court below is not an abuse of the process of the Court. All the grounds taken by the applicants will be available to them before the court below. It is further directed that anything which has been stated in this order will not be prejudical in the trial before the court below. This Court finds no merit in interfering with the present case. The C-482 application is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. Interim order, if any, is also vacated. No order as to costs. Learned counsel for the applicants at this stage prays that direction be given to the Magistrate concerned to consider and dispose of the bail applications of the applicants on the same day when it is filed before him. Normally this Court does not direct any subordinate court to decide the bail application on the same day, as that would be interfering with the judicial discretion of the Court hearing the bail application in view of the direction given by the Full Bench of Allahabad High Court in Smt. Amarawati and another Vs. State of U.P. [2004 (57) ALR 390]. Though it is directed that in case the applicants move bail applications and present themselves in the Court concerned, the learned Magistrate will consider and dispose of such a bail application on the same day by looking into the entire aspect of the matter. Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the court concerned for necessary compliance. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J) 09.09.2010 Kuldeep