Dismissed

Shivkant Singh Yadav and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC29 Nov 2018A482/4470/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused the prayer for quashing the summons order and entire proceedings in a criminal complaint involving allegations of dowry demand and harassment under Sections 323, 498-A, 504, 506 IPC and D.P. Act. The court held that the dispute is not suitable for quashing and directed applicants no. 2 to 6 to file an application for discharge, while refusing the applicant husband any relief

What did the court decide?

The prayer for quashing the entire proceedings was refused. Applicant no. 1 was denied leave to appear through counsel. Applicants no. 2 to 6 were granted a period to file a discharge application.

Shivkant Singh Yadav and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 55

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4470 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Shivkant Singh Yadav And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, Anita Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed for quashing of the summoning order dated 19.12.2017 passed by ACJM-III, Etawah as well as entire proceedings of complaint case no. 230 of 2017 (Smt. Arti Vs. Shivkant Singh Yadav and others), under sections 323, 498-A, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Ekdil, District Etawah, pending in the court of ACJM, Court No. 3, Etawah.

¶7

The contention of the counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. He further submitted that a number of civil cases are pending between the parties on account of which the applicants have been implicated in the present case.

¶8

The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicants have got a right of discharge under Section 239 or 227/228/245 Cr.P.C., as the case may be, through a proper application for the said purpose and they are free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.

¶9

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the averments made in the present application, the prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforementioned case is refused.

¶10

So far as applicants no.2 to 6 are concerned, it is provided that in case, the applicants no. 2 to 10 (Smt. Kanti Devi, Smt. Madhubala @ Pinki, Dilip Kumar @ Nitin Yadav, Ram Kumar Yadav and Shivpal Singh Yadav) move an appropriate application for discharge through counsel before the concerned Court below within a period of one month from today, the same shall be considered and disposed off as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law, by the concerned court below preferably within a period of four months, thereafter. For a period of five months from today or till the disposal of the discharge application, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be

¶11

taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

¶12

In case no such application is filed within a period of one month from today, as prescribed above, the present order shall stand automatically vacated.

¶13

So far as applicant no.1 is concerned, the applicant no.1 is the husband of opposite party no.2 and there are serious allegations regarding demand of dowry, therefore, no case for interference is made out. Hence, prayer of applicant no.1 (Shivkant Singh Yadav) for appearance before the court through counsel is hereby refused.

¶14

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of .

¶15

Order Date :- 29.11.2018 Prajapati

¶16

[Chandra Dhari Singh, J]

Shivkant Singh Yadav and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivkant Singh Yadav 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lalit and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shiv Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Milan Nishad Vs State of U.P. and another

Ram Krishan Vs State of Up and Another

Arun Alias Arun Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kapil Chauhan @ Kapil Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another