Disposed

Vimala @ Bimala Devi v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC21 Oct 2024A227/5215/2024

Download

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

Vimala @ Bimala Devi vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:167600

¶2

Court No. - 85

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5215 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Vimala @ Bimala Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dileep Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Dileep Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for petitioner and learned AGA for the State.

¶7

The instant petition has been preferred with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 07.12.2021 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasiya, Kushinagar in Complaint Case No.1946 of 2021 (Tara Devi Vs. Ram Pravesh Maurya and others), under Sections 323, 506, 498-A IPC and Section 4 of D.P. Act as well as impugned order dated 29.01.2024 passed by learned Session Judge, Kushinagar in Criminal Revision No.194 of 2023 (Ram Pratap Maurya and others Vs. State of U.P. and others) preferred at the behest of petitioner against summoning order dated 07.12.2021.

¶8

Learned counsel for petitioner pressed all the grounds whatsoever have been taken through the instant petition through which, it has been apprised that there is hardly any attraction of sections in which the petitioner has been summoned and all these grounds have not been taken into consideration while passing the order dated 07.12.2021. Learned counsel for petitioner further submitted that the revisional court has also repeated the same illegality while passing the impugned order dated 29.01.2024 through which revision preferred by petitioner challenging the order dated 07.12.2021, has been rejected. Learned counsel for petitioner further contended that both the orders passed by the courts concerned, are against the weight of evidence and as such, the same may be quashed.

¶9

Per contra, learned AGA for the State vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant petition on the ground that both the impugned orders have been passed after considering the material available on record which are just and proper.

¶10

Be that as it may, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the matter pending by way of calling counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit by the parties and as such, learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasiya, Kushinagar is hereby directed to expedite and finalize the proceedings of Complaint Case No.1946 of 2021 (Tara Devi Vs. Ram Pravesh Maurya and others), as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 12 months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order before him without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties but after giving full opportunity of hearing to both sides.

¶11

However, it is made clear that the petitioner will be at liberty to appear before the court concerned through her counsel.

¶12

The instant petition is hereby disposed of accordingly.

¶13

Order Date :- 21.10.2024 Vivek Kr.

¶14

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

Vimala @ Bimala Devi v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

What the court decided

Vimala @ Bimala Devi v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Monu @ Rajesh vs State of Up and Another

Smt Badama Devi and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dharma Sagar and Another vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Praveen Gambhir and 6 Others vs State of Up and Another

Mohammad Aslam vs State of U.P. and Another

Jagpal vs State of Up and 4 Others