Dismissed

Abhinav Chaturvedi @ Sonu and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC1 May 2019A482/4531/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court refused to quash the summoning order and proceedings in a dowry harassment and physical abuse case. It directed immediate bail consideration for the main applicant, an application for discharge by the other two applicants within 30 days, and a 60-day stay on coercive action for the main applicant.

What did the court decide?

Application to quash proceedings/summoning order refused; Bail disposed of on same day as custody; Discharge application by applicants 2 & 3 to be decided in 30 days via reasoned order; Coercive actio

Abhinav Chaturvedi @ Sonu and 2 Others Vs State of U.P… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4531 of 2016

¶3

Applicant :- Abhinav Chaturvedi @ Sonu And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anand Kumar Pandey,Sharique Ahmed

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Code') has been filed on behalf of the applicants with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 12.01.2016 as well as entire proceedings of Case No.289/IX of 2016 (State Vs. Abhinav Chaturvedi and others), arising out of Case Crime No.539 of 2015 , under Sections 498A, 323, 324 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station -Govind Nagar, District- Mathura, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants contended that no specific role has been assigned to applicant no.2, Ashok Chaturvedi and applicant no.3, Smt. Geeta.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer so made and contentions thereof raised by learned counsel for the applicants and contended that the material on record was sufficient for justifying initiation of proceedings and passing of the impugned summoning order in the aforesaid case against the applicants by the court below.

¶9

From the perusal of the F.I.R., material on record and looking into the facts of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out.

¶10

All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 of Code.

¶11

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

¶12

However, it is directed that if applicants apply for bail, the same

¶13

shall be disposed of on the same day on which they are taken into custody as per the guidelines prescribed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar and Another v. Union of India reported in 2018 SCC OnLine SC 1501.

¶14

It is further directed that in case applicant nos. 2 and 3 - Ashok Chaturvedi and Smt. Geeta file application for discharge through counsel within 30 days from today, the same shall be decided by the trial court/magistrate concerned by a reasoned and speaking order, in view of the judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Geeta Mehrotra and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Another reported in (2012) 10 SCC 741.

¶15

For a period of 60 days from today or till applicant no. 1 - Abhinav Chaturvedi @ Sonu surrenders and applies for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against him.

¶16

Till the disposal of discharge application, no coercive action shall be taken against applicant nos. 2 and 3.

¶17

With the aforesaid observations/directions, the instant application stands disposed of.

¶18

Order Date :- 1.5.2019 Radhika

Abhinav Chaturvedi @ Sonu and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhinav Chaturvedi @ Sonu and 2 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suresh Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Mustaqeem Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinod Kumar Jain Vs Indrabhan Jain and 4 Others

Munish Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mangroo @ Hari Shanker Pandey and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sita Ram Yadav and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another