Disposed

Sumit Kumar and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC16 Aug 2018A482/26719/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused to quash criminal proceedings under Sections 498A and Dowry Prohibition Act. While directing the trial court to refer the case to the mediation committee, the court allowed applications for discharge under Section 245(2) Cr.P.C. to be filed within 30 days and stayed coercive action against specific applicants pending proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Directed reference to mediation committee; allowed discharge applications to be filed; stayed coercive action against specific applicants.

Sumit Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 13

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26719 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Sumit Kumar And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Raghuraj Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the entire criminal proceedings as well as Non-Bailable Warrant order dated 18.01.2018 of Complaint Case NO. 531/2016 (Karishma Vs. Sumit Kumar and others) under Sections 498A, 323 and 506 I.P.C. and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Balrai, District Etawah pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-1, Etawah.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment with false and fabricated allegations.

¶8

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

¶9

Perused the impugned order. At this stage, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant.

¶10

The prayer for quashing the entire proceeding in the aforesaid case, is refused.

¶11

In view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rajesh Sharma and others Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in 2017 0 AIR (SC) 3869, learned Magistrate is directed to refer the case to committee of mediation centre at District Court, Etawah within 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶12

The committee of mediation centre shall submit its report within one month from the date of receipt of the case before the learned Magistrate.

¶13

If bail application is filed by the applicants, the same shall be decided according to direction contained in Rajesh Sharma's case (supra).

¶14

It is further provided that in case the applicant no. 3 Smt. Sheetla Devi claims discharge under Section 245(2) Cr.P.C. through her counsel and applicant no. 1 Sumit Kumar and applicant no. 2 Ishwar Dayal claim discharge under Section 245(2) Cr.P.C. in person within 30 days from today, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously by the trial court, strictly in accordance with law.

¶15

Till the disposal of the discharge application, no coercive action shall be taken against applicant no. 3 Smt. Sheetla Devi.

¶16

Till the submission of report by the committee of mediation centre, no coercive action shall be taken against applicant no. 1 Sumit Kumar and applicant no. 2 Ishwar Dayal.

¶17

With the aforesaid observations, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., stands disposed of.

¶18

Order Date :- 16.8.2018 Sharad/-

Sumit Kumar and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sumit Kumar and 2 Others 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shree Ram Vs State of U.P. and Another

Brijesh Kumar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Brijesh Kumar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Danish and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanjeev Shambhoolal Vs State of Up and 2 Others

Jitendra and 2 Others Vs State of Up and 2 Others