Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the entire record.

2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant for quashing the further proceeding of Complaint Case No.2520 of 2019, under Sections 420, 504 and 506 I.P.C. pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 8th, Ghaziabad, Police Station Indrapuram, District Ghaziabad.

3. Foremost contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the impugned summoning order is not in conformity with the statement of the complainant recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and statements of witnesses recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C. His further submission is that the learned trial Court while passing the impugned summoning order has failed to appreciate the fact that the complainant's version of the incident, as stated in the complaint, is not substantiated by the statement of the complainant recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and the statement of witnesses recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C. Thus, he has contended that even prima facie no offence is disclosed against the applicant, despite this fact, they have been summoned to face the trial which is nothing but malicious prosecution and an abuse of the process of the Court.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has vehemently argued that the dispute between the parties is primarily of civil nature and, therefore, no criminal liability can be fastened upon the applicant.

5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. controverts the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant on the ground that this is not a stage where minute and meticulous exercise with regard to the appreciation of evidence may be done and truthfulness of the allegations could only be tested in a criminal trial. At this initial stage, the fact of innocence of the applicant can also not be determined.

6. Learned A.G.A. further submits that the sufficiency of the material and the test to be applied at the stage of issue of process has been considered in the case of Nupur Talwar vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another (2012) 11 SCC 465 , [LQ/SC/2012/517] wherein it has been reiterated that the test to be applied at the stage was whether the material placed before the Magistrate was "sufficient for proceeding against the accused" and not "sufficient to prove and establish the guilt".

7. On the basis of the aforesaid, he submits that no interference with the impugned summoning order and proceedings is warranted at this stage and, therefore, the application is misconceived and is liable to be dismissed.

8. Having heard learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of the records, it transpires that the allegations in the complaint have been found to be duly corroborated by the statement made on oath by the complainant during the course of examination under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and also the statements of witnesses recorded during inquiry made by the learned Magistrate under Section 202 Cr.P.C.. The impugned order has been passed referring the aforesaid statements recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and under Section 202 Cr.P.C. and only thereafter, impugned summoning order has been passed. Therefore, at this initial stage, no ground for quashing the impugned summoning order and the proceedings of aforesaid case is made out. The applicant will have an opportunity at the appropriate stage to move an application for discharge taking therein all the pleas which may be available to him, in accordance with law.

9. Accordingly, prayer for quashing the further proceedings of aforesaid Complaint Case No.2520 of 2019 is hereby refused.

10. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, if the applicant appears before the Court below and applies for grant of bail, the prayer for bail shall be considered and decide the same expeditiously, in accordance with the settled law.

11. In view of the aforesaid observations, the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of.