Dismissed

Sachin and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC16 Dec 2019A482/46444/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court refused the application to quash summons and proceedings in a Section 482 petition arising from a matrimonial dispute involving dowry allegations and assault. The applicant was directed to surrender for bail consideration within 30 days, with no coercive action pending.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of summons and proceedings refused. Applicants directed to surrender for bail within 30 days. No coercive action during this period.

Sachin and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 46444 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Sachin And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, 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 summoning order dated 4.1.2019 and entire criminal proceedings of Complaint Case No. 4032 of 2018 (Smt. Ayushi Vs. Sachin and others), under Sections 498-A, 323 IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Kotwali Dehat, District- Saharanpur, pending in the court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate-IV, Saharanpur as well as revisional order dated 16.9.2019 passed by District Judge, Saharanpur in Criminal Revision No. 115 of 2019.

¶7

As per the allegations made in the complaint, it is alleged that opposite party no. 2 was married to applicant no. 1 on 13.7.2016, however after the said marriage the applicants started demanding additional dowry and for non-fulfilment of demand of additional dowry, they started torturing and maltreating her and committed cruelty with her and has also assaulted her, due to which the victim suffered injuries and her child was aborted.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the complaint and the material collected during the course of inquiry, no offence is disclosed against the applicants 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 inquiry, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicants and as such, entire proceedings cannot be quashed.

¶10

At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the cases of R.P.

¶11

Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283.

¶12

The prayer for quashing the summoning order as well as proceedings of the aforementioned case is refused.

¶13

However, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of settled law laid down by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement 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).

¶14

For a period of 30 days from today or till the applicants surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against them. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 16.12.2019 KU

Sachin and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachin 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

Shailendra Singh Yadav and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd. Samsuddin Siddiqui and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd. Azam Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Alok Singh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Veer Pal Singh @ Veer Pratap Vs State of U.P.and Another

Shashibala and Another Vs State of U.P.and Another