Dismissed

Aman Verma v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC7 Dec 2019A482/45168/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 CrPC to quash proceedings in a matrimonial cruelty case, the Court held that disputed questions of fact cannot be adjudicated at this stage. Since prima facie offence is made out, the application was dismissed, though bail was directed to be considered upon surrender.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing apprehensions refused; directed to consider bail application if applicant surrenders.

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

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 45168 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Aman Verma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.487 of 2019 (Gaurav Kumar Vs. Aman Verma and other), under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Amanpur, District Kasganj, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, District Kasganj.

¶7

As per the allegations made in the complaint, it is alleged that the Opposite Party No.2 was married to applicant on 03.11.2014, however, after the said marriage, the applicant started making demand of additional dowry from the Opposite Party No.2 and for non-fulfillment of demand of additional dowry, he used to torture her, maltreat her and assaulted her and committed cruelty with her and threatened to kill her by administering poisonous injection, in case she gives birth to a female child and she was also turned out of her matrimonial home.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the complaint and the material collected during the course of enquiry, no offence is disclosed against the applicant and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He has pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

¶9

Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the complaint and the material collected during the course of enquiry, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicant and as such, entire proceedings cannot be quashed.

¶10

Moreover, all the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 CrPC. At this stage, only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of

¶11

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 disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.

¶12

The prayer for quashing the entire proceedings is therefore refused.

¶13

However, it is directed that if the applicant appears/surrenders before the court below and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided as expeditiously as possible after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties.

¶14

With the aforesaid observations, this application under Section 482 CrPC is finally disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 7.12.2019 Nadim

Aman Verma v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aman Verma 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

Saurabh Srivastava and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Raju Gupta and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chetan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shashi Kala Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Ashutosh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dharmendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another