Dismissed

Smt Dipsi v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC29 Apr 2019A482/14648/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of a complaint and summoning order, the High Court refused the prayer. It observed that an alternative remedy exists under Section 245(2) CrPC and directed the trial court to decide the discharge application if filed within 30 days.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash the complaint and summoning order refused; applicant directed to file application under Section 245(2) CrPC within 30 days.

Smt Dipsi Vs State of Up and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 14648 of 2019 Applicant :- Smt Dipsi Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pramod Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶5

This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Code') has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to quash the Complaint Case No. 4213 of 2017 (Kapil v. Harnam Singh and others), under Section 384 I.P.C., Police Station - Sihani Gate, District - Ghaziabad as well as the summoning order dated 24.05.2018 passed by A.C.J.M., Court No. 3, Ghaziabad.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant is wife of opposite party no. 2 Kapil Kumar. Kapil Kumar has not uttered a single word against the applicant, in his statement under Section 200 of the Code. Accordingly, no offence is made out against the applicant.

¶7

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer and contention raised by learned counsel for the applicant and contended that there is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order passed by the trial court.

¶8

Alternate remedy is available to the applicant to submit application under Section 245(2) of the Code to get herself discharged. Accordingly, it is not appropriate for this Court to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code.

¶9

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

¶10

Accordingly, it is directed that in case the applicant files an application under Section 245(2) of the Code for discharge through counsel within 30 days from today, the same shall be decided by the trial court by a reasoned and speaking order, strictly in accordance with law.

¶11

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

¶12

With the aforesaid observation/direction, the instant application stands disposed of.

¶13

Order Date :- 29.4.2019 I. Batabyal

Smt Dipsi v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Dipsi v. State of Up 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

Noor Mohammad and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Murti and 2 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Ramannu Lal @Munnu Lal and 3 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Laxmi Shankar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pradeep Kumar Gupta Vs State of Up and Another

Sangram Pathak and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another