Dismissed

Lavkush Bhartiya and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC27 May 2019A482/20953/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash summons order in domestic violence complaint was dismissed. Court held prima facie evidence existed for summons, but ordered bail consideration if application moved within three weeks; otherwise order ineffective.

What did the court decide?

Application for quashing of summons order is refused; bail or discharge may be moved within three weeks.

Lavkush Bhartiya and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20953 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Lavkush Bhartiya And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present applicant under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the proceedings of Criminal Complaint Case No. 2366 of 2017, (Shalu versus Lavkush Bhartiya & Others), as well as the impugned summoning order dated 16.5.2019, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. & 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Dhoomanganj, District Allahabad, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-8, Allahabad.

¶7

Allegations made in the complaint and statement are mischievous and the court below has failed to appreciate the proper facts and circumstances of the case and has wrongly, summoned the applicants under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. & 3/4 D.P. Act. The summoning order is illegal and not sustainable and entire proceeding is in abuse of process of the Court.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for quashment of the summoning order and submitted that the summoning order is just and legal which requires no interference by this Court.

¶9

Perusal of the record itself reflects that at this stage, it cannot be said that prima facie evidence is lacking for summoning the applicants under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. & 3/4 D.P. Act.

¶10

Considered the above submissions and the contents disclosed in the complaint. No good ground is made out for quashment of the impugned summoning order. Accordingly, the prayer for quashment of the impugned summoning order is refused.

¶11

However, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, it is provided that in case the applicants appear before the court concerned within three weeks from today and move application for bail/discharge, the same shall be considered and disposed of by the court concerned in accordance with law after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties.

¶12

It is made clear that in the event no such application is

¶13

moved within the time prescribed above, this order will be of no avail to the applicants.

¶14

With the above direction, the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of .

¶15

Order Date :- 27.5.2019 S Rawat

Lavkush Bhartiya and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lavkush Bhartiya and 4 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

Ravi Kumar Soni and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Gavendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Premsheela Vs State of Up and 05 Others

Neeraj Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mehrunissa Vs State of Up and Another