Allowed

Charan Singh and Another v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC20 Sept 2024A227/4861/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged summoning and revisional orders in a dowry and death case under Article 227. High Court held disputes were questions of fact beyond its scope but granted relistment for discharge and suspended coercive measures for 30 days.

What did the court decide?

Direction to dispose of discharge application within two weeks; no coercive measures for 30 days or till disposal.

Charan Singh and Another vs State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:153530

¶2

Court No. - 87

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4861 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Charan Singh And Another Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Tripathi,Vinod Kumar Tirpathi

¶5

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri S.C. Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The instant petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed with a prayer to set aside the impugned summoning order dated 10.12.2021 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bijnor as well as impugned revisional order dated 29.2.2024 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge/Fast Track, Court No. 1, Bijnor in Criminal Revision No. 149 of 2023 (Charan Singh and Another vs. State of U.P. and Others) arising out of Complaint No. 3274 of 2013 (Shakunta Devi vs. Charan Singh and Another) under Sections 498-A, 304-B, IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kotwali City, District Bijnor.

¶9

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 petitioners. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court. Only in cases where the Court finds that there has been failure of justice or misuse of judicial mechanism or procedure, sentence or order was not correct, this power may be exercised to prevent the abuse of process of miscarriage of justice.

¶10

Accordingly, prayer of the petitioners is refused .

¶11

However, in view of the submissions, it is provided that in case the petitioners move an application for discharge through counsel within 30 days, the same shall be disposed of by the Trial Court by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within two weeks thereafter.

¶12

For a period of 30 days or till the disposal of the discharge application, whichever is earlier, no coercive measures shall be taken against the petitioners in the aforesaid case.

¶13

With the aforesaid direction, this petition is disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 20.9.2024 Puspendra

¶15

Digitally signed by :- PUSPENDRA NARAYAN SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Charan Singh and Another v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Charan Singh and Another 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rampal Sharma vs State of Up and Another

Vaibhav Gupta and Another vs State of Up and Another

Mashuk Ali vs State of Up and 14 Others

Mohd. Asif vs State of U.P. and Another

Kamal Singh and 2 Others vs State of U.P and Another

Grow Max Engineering Pvt. Ltd. vs Neal and Company, Gbt Nagar, Allahabad