Dismissed

Zaheer Khan and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC5 Nov 2019A482/37890/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court refused to quash the summoning order in a dowry harassment case as disputed questions of fact preclude intervention under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Applicants were given thirty days to surrender for bail consideration without coercive action during that period.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash summoning order dismissed; thirty days granted to surrender for bail consideration without coercive action.

Zaheer Khan and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 72

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 37890 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Zaheer Khan And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants for quashing of the summoning order dated 1.4.2019 and quash the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 1250/2018, under section 498A, 323, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act (, Smt. Rukhsar Bano Vs. Yusuf and others, pending in the court of A.C.J.M, Firozabad.

¶7

As per the allegation made in the complaint, it is alleged that the marriage of O.P. No.2 was solemnised with the son of the applicants, however, after marriage the applicants started demanding additional dowry and for non-fulfilment of demand of additional dowry, they started torturing and maltreating her and also assaulted her and turned her out of her matrimonial house.

¶8

The contention of counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present application has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He has also pointed out certain documents in support of his contention.

¶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. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶10

At this stage, disputed question of fact cannot be considered, therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283 , the prayer for quashing the summoning order is refused.

¶11

However, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within thirty days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of settled law laid down by

¶12

this Court in the case of Amrawati and another vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC).

¶13

For a period of thirty days from today or till the applicants surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶14

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

¶15

Order Date :- 5.11.2019

¶16

Zaheer Khan and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Zaheer Khan and Another 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

Preet Tyagi Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Arvind Kushwaha and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ballu @ Rajesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chandra Kant Pandey and another Vs State of U.P. and another

Vijay Singh and Another Vs State of Up and Anr.

Rohit Bishnoi and 2 Others Vs State of Up and Anr.