Dismissed

Shama v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC11 May 2022A482/27420/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment rejects an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash a cognizance order. The court held that since the applicant possesses alternative statutory remedies to move for summons of the accused under Sections 319 and 377 Cr.P.C., the Section 482 application was not maintainable.

What did the court decide?

The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was rejected as not maintainable due to the availability of alternative statutory remedies.

Shama Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 27420 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Shama Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Srivastava,Akhilesh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Sadhna Rani (Thakur),J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

Instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to quash the order dated 09.09.2021 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division)/F.T.C./A.C.J.M., District - Bijnor in Misc. Application No. 73 of 2021 (State vs. Amir Khan & others) arising out of Case Crime No. 40 of 2020, under Section 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Section 3/4 of Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, P.S. Mahila Thana, District - Bijnor.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the investigating officer has not conducted fair investigation in the matter and illegally exonerated the brother-in-law Mohd. Sameer. The learned trial court has not summoned the husband of the applicant under Section 377 Cr.P.C., though specific allegation has been levelled against him by the applicant in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Thus, the learned trial court, without going into the evidence on record, has passed the impugned cognizance order.

¶8

I have gone through the allegations made in the FIR. The allegations are that the in-laws of the applicant were not satisfied with the dowry given in the marriage. They used to demand one Alto car and cash of Rs.5 Lakh as additional dowry and the applicant was being mentally and physically harassed for the same. Her husband used to conduct unnatural sex with her. In the absence of her husband, her brother-in-law Mohd. Sameer himself and along with other persons used to rape her and when she complained this to her father-in-law and motherin-law they also supported their sons. On 25.8.2020 her husband came from Delhi and when she complained of the conduct of her brother-in-law to her husband, he became annoyed and assaulted her with a knife and injured her seriously.

¶9

The investigating officer investigated the matter and exonerated the brother-in-law of the applicant on the basis of evidence available on record and has filed charge-sheet under Section 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Section 3/4 of Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

¶10

In my opinion, for summoning the brother-in-law, the applicant has a remedy to move an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. before the trial court and so far as not summoning of the husband under Section 377 Cr.P.C. is concerned, the applicant has a remedy to raise objection at the time of framing of charges before the trial court.

¶11

Since the applicant has alternative statutory remedy, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is not maintainable and is liable to be rejected.

¶12

The application is, accordingly, rejected.

¶13

Order Date :- 11.5.2022 nd

¶14

Digitally signed by NISITH DEY Date: 2022.05.12 14:19:36 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shama v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shama v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Suneeta Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohammad Rustam Ansari Vs State of U.P. and Anothers

Mazid Khan Vs State of U.P.

Basanti Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Sunderwati and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bal Kishan Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others