Dismissed

Amit Singh 2 Others v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC14 Jul 2021A482/2422/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. sought to quash a summoning order in a matrimonial dispute involving Sections 498A and IPC. The court held that the allegations disclosed a prima facie case and dismissed the application, reserving disputes for trial.

What did the court decide?

The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was dismissed; the summoning order stands;

Amit Singh 2 Others Vs State of Up and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2422 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Amit Singh 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shailendra Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Ashish Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging summoning order dated 23.09.2020 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division)/ Fast Tract Court/Judicial Magistrate, Kannauj in Complaint Case No. 1522 of 2019 (Smt. Meera Devi Vs. Amit Singh and others) under Sections 498A, 323 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 D. P. Act, Police Station-Kannauj, District-Kannauj as well as entire proceedings of the above mentioned case number panding in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)/ Fast Tract Court/Judicial Magistrate, Kannau.

¶7

Learned counsel for applicants contens that prior to the complained filed by opposite party no.2 giriving rise to present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the complainant lodged an F.I.R. dated 08.09.2017, which was registered as Case Crime No. 1360 of 2017 under Sections 498A, 323, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D. P. Act, P.S.- Kannauj, District-Dannauj. Police upon completion of statutory investigation of above mentioned case crime number in terms of Chapter XII Cr.P.C, submitted a final report which has not challenged by complainant. Subsequent thereto, complainant lodged second F.I.R., which has been registered as Case Crime No. 0018 of 2018 under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D. P. Act P.S. Kannauj, District, Kannauj. Again Police upon completion of statutory investigation above mentioned case crime number in

¶8

terms of Chapter XII Cr.P.C, submitted a final report.Thereafter, complainant-opposite party 2 has filed above mentioned complaint case. The concerned Magistrate after taking into consideration the statement of complainant and statement of witnesses adduced by her has passed summoning order dated 23.09.2020. Aggrieved by summoning order dated 23.09.2020, applicants have now approached this Court by means present applicant under Section 482 Cr.P.C

¶9

On the aforesaid premise, learned counsel for applicants contends that present criminal proceedings initiated by opposite party 2 are not only malicious but also an abuse of process of court. Remedy of complainant was to file protest petition against the final reports submitted in above mentioned case crime numbers. Learned counsel for applicants further contends that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of aforesaid contention. It is thus urged that present application is liable to be allowed.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed this application. He contends that it is the admitted case of applicants that opposite party no.2 is legally wedded wife of applicant-1. She is residing with her parents since 23.09.2020. In the affidavit filed in support of present application, there is no averment that applicant-1 is maintaining his wife i.e. complainant-opposite party 2. Furthermore, the Magistrate while passing the impugned summoning order has clearly considered the statements of complainant and witnesses adduced by her. On the basis of aforesaid a prima-facie satisfaction has been recorded by Magistrate.

¶11

From perusal of 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 applicants. All the submissions made at the Bar relate to the disputed defence of applicants, which cannot

¶12

be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under section 482 Cr.PC. At this stage only prime facie case is to be seen in the light of law laid down by Supreme Court in R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866 and State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar v. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283.

¶13

For the facts and reasons noted above, this court does not find any good ground to entertain the present application. Present application fails and is liable to be dismissed.

¶14

It is accordingly dismissed.

¶15

Order Date :- 14.7.2021 YK

Amit Singh 2 Others v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Singh 2 Others v. State of Up 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

Umesh Chandra Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation and 2 Others

Sanjay Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Birbal Chauhan Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Revenue and 7 Others

Monu Rajendra Marothiya Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Arif Malik @ Mohammad Arif Vs State of U.P. and Another

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