Partly allowed

Ankit Shukla and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC9 May 2023A482/4658/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment dismisses the quashing application of the husband (Appellant 1) as disputed facts require trial court determination via discharge application. For other appellants (Jeth, mother-in-law, Jethani), the court directed them to file separate bail applications referencing recent Supreme Court precedent.

What did the court decide?

Application of husband dismissed; co-appellants directed to file separate bail applications within 30 days.

Ankit Shukla and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:99713

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4658 of 2021

¶4

Applicant :- Ankit Shukla And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ardhendu Shekhar Sharma,Ram Babu Sharma

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Arvind Mishra,Kuldeep Kumar Dixit,Kuldeep Singh

¶6

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶7

Heard Sri Ardhendu Shekhar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Kuldeep Kumar Dixit, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as well as perused the material available on record.

¶8

This petition has been filed by the applicants for quashing of the impugned charge sheet dated 16.05.2020 filed against the applicant no.1- Ankit Shukla under Sections 498-A, 323, 307 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act and against the applicant nos. 2, 3 and 4, under Sections 498-A, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act in Case Crime No. 145 of 2020, Police Station- Banda, District- Shahjahanpur, pending before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate- II, Shahjahanpur with a further prayer to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case.

¶9

It is contended that the matter was referred to Mediation Centre of this Court vide order dated 03.09.2021 on the joint request made by the parties. Despite the matter being referred to the Mediation Centre, the settlement between the parties could not be arrived at and has failed on 22.04.2022.

¶10

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that since the mediation in the matter has failed the matter may be decided on merits.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicants further submitted that the applicant no.1 is husband, applicant no.2 is Jeth, applicant no.3 is mother-in-law and applicant no.4 is Jethani and opposite party no. 2 has initiated the present proceedings roping in the entire family of her husband, the applicant no.1, although no offence against the applicant nos. 2, 3 and 4 is disclosed from the material on record.

¶12

However, from the perusal of the 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 the applicant no. 1 (husband). Allegations levelled clearly reflects that dowry was demanded by the applicant and on that account opposite party no. 2 has been continuously harassed. Details of allegations are given comprehensively in the FIR as a result of which opposite party no. 2 suffered mental torture which amounts to cruelty. All the submissions in respect of husband applicant no. 1 made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicant No. 1 (husband) has got a right of discharge through a proper application for the said purpose and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.

¶13

In view of above, application in respect of applicant no. 1 (husband) is hereby dismissed.

¶14

So far as the applicant no.2 is Jeth, applicant no.3 is motherin-law and applicant no.4 is Jethani are concerned, the applicant nos. 2, 3 and 4 are directed to appear before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, the same shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid down in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2021 SCC Online SC 922.

¶15

Order Date :- 9.5.2023 Krishna*

¶16

Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ankit Shukla and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankit Shukla and 3 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

Sooraj and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Manniram @ Munni Ram Vs State of U.P. and Another

Keshav Kumar @ Keshav Singh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. . and Another

Intzar and 18 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ved Prakash Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

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