Partly allowed

Satpal Verma and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC25 Feb 2020A482/7582/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of a criminal proceeding and summoning order arising from a matrimonial dispute, the court found that a prima facie case was established. The quashability prayer was refused, but the applicants were granted a 30-day direction from coercive action to appear and seek bail.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing refused; no coercive action for 30 days if applicants appear and apply for bail.

Satpal Verma and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 82

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7582 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Satpal Verma And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Abhinav Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No. 240/9 of 2019 Sanjay Vs. Satpal Verma and others under section 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Kairana, District Shamli pending in the court of C.J.M. Shamli as well as impugned summoning order dated 19.9.2019 passed by C.J.M. Shamli.

¶7

The contention of the learned counsel for the applicants is that the daughter of applicant no. 1 and sister of applicant nos. 2 and 3 namely Renu was married with Pravesh There is matrimonial dispute in between daughter of applicant no. 1 and her husband. The O.P. No. 2 is Jija (brother-in-law) of husband of Renu who has filed this false and frivolous complaint against the applicants only for the purpose of harassment. No such incident has taken place. The present prosecution has been instituted only for the purpose of harassment.

¶8

A perusal of record shows that the applicants have been summoned to face trial on the basis of statements of complainant and witnesses recorded under section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. The O.P. No. 2 in his complaint has made allegation for committing marpit against the applicants. The learned Magistrate after considering the entire evidence available on record and finding a prima facie case has summoned the applicants to face trial under section 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC. The learned Magistrate dealing with the complaint at this stage has to see only prima facie case and it can not be said that no prima facie case is made out against the applicants. The disputed defence of the accused can not be considered at this stage.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any ground to quash the entire proceeding of the aforementioned case as well as summoning order dated 19.9.2019, therefore, the prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused.

¶10

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 the settled law laid 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 reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. For a period of 30 days from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of 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.

¶11

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

¶12

Order Date :- 25.2.2020 Masarrat

Satpal Verma and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satpal Verma 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

Yashpal Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Arif Gudda and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Manoj Kumar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Aman Veer Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Deepak Agrawal Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Ashok Kumar and 3 Others Vs State of Up and Another