Dismissed

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

Allahabad HC16 Aug 2018A482/26737/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused a plea to quash criminal proceedings under s. 406 IPC in a matrimonial dispute, finding no immediate basis to say no offence was made out. The court ordered mediation and set timelines for deciding discharge applications and stayed coercive action against applicants.

What did the court decide?

Application to quash summoning order and proceedings dismissed. Mediation directed. Coercive action stayed.

Danish and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 13

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26737 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Danish And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Akbar Shah Alam Khan 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 u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 02.02.2018 as well as entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No. 4895/9 of 2017 (Smt. Farzana Vs. Danish & others) under Section 406 I.P.C., Police Station- Civil Line, District Muzaffar Nagar, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffar Nagar.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants contended that this is the matter of matrimonial disputes and from the material brought on the record, no offence is disclosed against the applicants. The present prosecution launched against the applicants is wholly mala fide and as such, the present proceedings are an abuse of the process of the court.

¶8

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

¶9

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants.

¶10

In view of the above, the prayer for quashing the summoning order as well as entire proceeding in the aforesaid case is refused.

¶11

However, as per direction of 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 mediation centre at District Court, Muzaffar Nagar within 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶12

The 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 and others Vs. State of U.P. and another (supra).

¶14

It is further provided that in case applicant no. 3 Smt. Rabiya, applicant no. 4 Smt. Hina, applicant no. 5 Smt. Rani and applicant no. 6 Smt. Jeenat claim discharge under Section 245(2) Cr.P.C. through counsel and applicant no. 1 Danish and applicant no. 2 Anees claim discharge under Section 245(2) Cr.P.C. in person within 30 days from today, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously in view of the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Geeta Mehrotra & Another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2012 Law Suit (SC) 716.

¶15

For a period of sixty days, no coercive action shall be taken against applicant no. 1 Danish and applicant no. 2 Anees.

¶16

Till the disposal of discharge application, no coercive action shall be taken against applicant no. 3 Smt. Rabiya, applicant no. 4 Smt. Hina, applicant no. 5 Smt. Rani and applicant no. 6 Smt. Jeenat.

¶17

With the above directions, the instant application is finally disposed of .

¶18

Order Date :- 16.8.2018 Sharad/-

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Danish and 5 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

Sumit Kumar and 2 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