Jitendra @ Ankit and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

Jitendra @ Ankit and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of with liberty to the applicants to file a discharge application raising the grounds urged (Section 202 Cr.P.C. contentions); if such application is filed within two weeks it is to be considered and decided in accordance with law within about four weeks after hearing all parties, subject to no legal impediment; no coercive action against the applicants for two weeks in pursuance of the impugned order dated 30.03.2024.

Issue for consideration

Ground (a) of the challenge: whether the summoning order is vitiated because the death is said to have occurred in Haryana, in which event the provisions of Section 202 Cr.P.C. would have to be followed. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Considering that the summoning order has been issued and the applicants have the remedy of filing a discharge application, the instant petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the applicants to file an application for discharge taking the aforesaid grounds (the Section 202 Cr.P.C. contentions); the Court did not itself decide those grounds.

Key takeaways

If an application for discharge is filed by the applicants within two weeks, the learned Court shall consider and decide it in accordance with law within about four weeks after hearing all the parties concerned, provided there is no legal impediment.ratio¶10
Interim protection: for a period of two weeks from the order, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in pursuance of the impugned summoning order dated 30.03.2024 passed in the complaint case.ratio¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (No. 7079 of 2024) challenging the summoning order dated 30.03.2024 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitapur, in Complaint Case No.5303 of 2022 (Vishram vs. Jitendra etc.), whereby the applicants were summoned for offences under Sections 498A and 306 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The applicants contended (a) that the death having occurred in Haryana, the provisions of Section 202 Cr.P.C. ought to have been followed, and (b) that the offence under Section 306 IPC being exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, all witnesses should have been examined under the mandatory proviso to Section 202 Cr.P.C. The Court did not adjudicate these grounds; observing that the summoning order had been issued and that the applicants had the remedy of a discharge application, it disposed of the petition leaving the applicants free to press those grounds in a discharge application, directed that such application, if filed within two weeks, be decided in accordance with law within about four weeks after hearing all parties, and restrained coercive action against the applicants for two weeks. Single Bench: Hon'ble Abdul Moin, J.; order dated 12.8.2024.

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:55375

Court No. - 11

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7079 of 2024

Applicant :- Jitendra @ Ankit And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

1. Heard.

Under challenge is the summoning order dated 30.03.2024 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitapur, in Complaint Case No.5303 of 2022 in re: Vishram vs. Jitendra etc.. By the said order, the applicants have been summoned for an offence under Sections 498A and 306 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

While raising a challenge to the said order, the argument of learned counsel for the applicants is two folds namely (a) that the death is said to have occurred in Haryana as such the provisions of Section 202 of Cr.P.C. would have to be followed, and (b) as the offence under Section 306 IPC is triable exclusively by the Court of Sessions consequently all witnesses should have been produced and examined as per the mandatory provisions of Section 202 Cr.P.C. proviso.

However, considering that the summoning order has been issued and the applicants have a remedy of filing of a discharge application as such the instant petition is disposed of leaving it open to the applicants to file an application for discharge taking the aforesaid grounds.

It is further provided that in case an application for discharge is filed within a period of two weeks from today by the applicants then the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law by the learned Court say within a period of four weeks after hearing all the parties concerned provided there is no legal impediment.

For a period of two weeks from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in pursuance to the impugned order dated 30.03.2024 passed in the aforesaid complaint case.

Order Date :- 12.8.2024

A. Katiyar

Digitally signed by :- AMIT KATIYAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench