Quashed

Panna Lal and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Sept 2024A482/29504/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed a summoning order in a matrimonial dispute involving Sections 498A and 506 IPC, finding it unreasoned and based on omnibus allegations. The Court relied on Supreme Court precedents requiring specificity in summoning and remanded the matter for a fresh order.

What did the court decide?

Impugned summoning order set-aside and matter remanded to Trial Court to pass a fresh order.

Panna Lal and 6 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:152525

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29504 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Panna Lal And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dharm Vir Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Dharm Vir Singh, learned counsel for the applicants.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant by referring part of impugned summoning order submitted that no reason has been assigned by the learned Trial Court therefore, offence under Sections 498A and 506 I.P.C. is not made out against seven persons as well as that there are general allegations against all the applicants. In this regard, learned counsel for the applicants has placed reliance in paragraph no.19 of the present application which is reproduced hereinafter:

¶8

"19. That the summoning order dated 09.11.2022 passed against the applicants in also bad in eyes of law inasmuch as the learned Magistrate while passing the impugned summoning order has not cared to record his satisfaction with regard to the fact that which offence as alleged is made out against which applicant thus by a general, non-speaking order the applicant has been summoned to face trial thus the impugned summoning order dated 09.11.2022 is liable to be quashed."

¶9

I have perused the impugned summoning order wherein after quoting the contents of complaint and statement of the complainant recorded under section 200 and of witnesses under Section 202 Cr.P.C. summoned the applicants by stating that "पतत्रावलली पर उपलब्ध समस्त सत्राक्ष्य ससे अभभिययक्तगण कसे भवरुद्ध धत् र ात्रा 498 ए, 323, 504, 506 भित्रा.द.स. व 3/4 दहसेज प्रभतषसेध अधधभनियम १० कत्रा प्रथमदृष्टत्रा अपरत्राध बनिनित्रा प्रतलीत हहोतत्रा हहै।"

¶10

Aforesaid reasoning is not sufficient that there are sufficient ground to proceed against the applicants. Learned Trial Court has also not taken note of judgments passed by Supreme Court in

¶11

Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam and others vs. State of Bihar and others, (2022) 6 SCC 599 and Achin Gupta Vs. State of Haryana & Anr 2024 INSC 369 , i.e. on basis of omnibus and general allegations, no offence be made out for offence related to matrimonial issues.

¶12

The impugned order is an unreasoned order, therefore, it is in the teeth of judgments passed by Supreme Court in Lalankumar Singh and others vs. State of Maharashtra, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1383 and Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. & Ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr, 2024 INSC 626 , therefore, impugned order dated 09.11.2022 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etah in Complaint Case No.6488 of 2021, (Sulachhana Devi Vs. Panna Lal and others) under Sections 498A, 323, 406 and 506 of I.P.C. Police Station-Mathura, District-Etah in aforesaid criminal case is hereby set-aside and matter is remanded to learned Trial Court to pass a fresh order within a period of three months from today after hearing the complainant since this order is passed without issuing notice to O.P.No.2.

¶13

This application is accordingly disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 19.9.2024

¶15

¶16

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP BHATTACHARYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Panna Lal and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Panna Lal and 6 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

Praveen Kumar Patel and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanjay Kumar Varshney and Another vs State of Up and Another

Mohd Akil Khan and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Priyanka Sinha and 4 Others vs State of Up and Another

Hariom Tripathi and Another vs State of Up and Another

Harsh Mishra and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and 2 Others