Partly allowed

Sonam v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Jun 2018A482/20757/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court partially disposed of a Section 482 Cr.P.C. application seeking quashing of a summoning order in an IPC case. The court held that the applicant should file for discharge under Section 245(2) Cr.P.C. and directed the trial court to dispose of it within thirty days.

What did the court decide?

The application disposed of; coercive action stayed pending discharge; trial court directed to decide discharge application within thirty days.

Sonam Vs State of U.P. and Another — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 54

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20757 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Sonam Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the summoning order dated 28.11.2015 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 9, Agra in Complaint Case No. 403/2015 (Shree Lal Yadav Vs. Rajkumar), under Sections 494, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Etmadpur, District Agra, whereby applicant Sonam and co-accused Rajkumar were summoned for offence punishable under Sections 494, 504 and 506 I.P.C.

¶7

Learned counsel for applicant contended that offence under Section 494 I.P.C. is not made out against applicant. There is no evidence on record to show that applicant has abetted the marriage of Smt. Sharda Devi with co-accused Rajkumar. Accordingly, impugned order against applicant by the learned trial court is not sustainable.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. contended that there is no illegality in the impugned order passed by learned trial court.

¶9

At this stage in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court, it is not proper to comment on the merit and fact of the case. However, remedy is available to applicant under Section 245(2) Cr.P.C. to get discharge herself.

¶10

In the result, the application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of .

¶11

However, learned trial court is directed that if applicant submits application under Section 245(2) Cr.P.C. for discharge through counsel within thirty days from the receipt of certified copy of this order, the same shall be decided within thirty days from the date of presentation of application by speaking order.

¶12

Till the disposal of discharge application under Section 245(2) Cr.P.C. filed by applicant, no coercive action shall be taken against applicant.

¶13

Order Date :- 6.6.2018 Sharad/-

Sonam v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonam v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Shruti Maheshwari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nishant Kushwaha @ Sharad and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Sher Singh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Tara and 10 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd. Mubarak Ali @ Mohd. Mubarik Ali and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Yashpal Chugh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another