Dismissed

Ravikar Verma and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC24 Oct 2024A482/9197/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed an application under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of an FIR and summoning order in a matrimonial dispute. The court held that since the applicant failed to deposit the directed interim amount, no relief could be granted, and the matter was remanded to the trial court for expeditious disposal.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 482 CrPC dismissed; trial court directed to conclude proceedings expeditiously.

Ravikar Verma and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:77690

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9197 of 2024 Applicant :- Ravikar Verma And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Aishwarya Pratap Singh,Manish Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶5

Vakalatnama filed by Sri Upendra Prakash Pathak, Advocate on behalf of opposite party no.2 is taken on record.

¶6

Heard.

¶7

The instant application has been filed by the applicants with prayer to quash the summoning order dated 10.04.2024 in Crl. Case No. 115 of 2024 as well as charge-sheet dated 06.10.2023 filed in F.I.R. No. 27 of 2023, Police Station- Mahila Thana and all consequential further proceedigs in the Case No. 115 of 2024 pending in the Court of Civil Judge, (J.D.), Court No.43/F.T.C., Barabanki.

¶8

On 24.10.2024, following order was passed:-

¶9

"1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶10

2. The present application has been filed by the applicants with prayer to quash the summoning order dated 10.04.2024 passed in Crl. Case No. 115 of 2024 and charge-sheet dated 06.10.2023 filed in F.I.R. No. 27 of 2023, Police Station- Mahila Thana along with all consequential consequential further proceedings in the Case No. 115 of 2024 pending in the Court of Civil Judge, (J.D.), Court No.43/F.T.C., Barabanki.

¶11

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that marriage of applicant no.1 was solemnized with opposite party no.2 as per the Hindu rites and rituals on 21.11.2019. However, after marriage ceremony was performed, i.e, on the next day, the opposite party 2 (bride) was not sent with the applicant no.1 on the pretext that there is no custom of sending the bride to their matrimonial home and the bride can only be sent at the time of 'Gauna'. Learned counsel for applicants further submits that the opposite party 2 was suffering from hip tuberculosis and that is why she was not in a position to even stand properly, and therefore, she did not come to the house of applicant no.1. As a result, a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed by the applicants and only when the notices were issued to the private respondent, the FIR in question was lodged. As this is a matrimonial dispute, submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that there is every possibility of settlement between the

¶12

parties, and therefore, matter may be sent to the Mediation Centre of this Court.

¶13

4. Learned A.G.A. has no objection, in case, the matter is sent to the Mediation Centre.

¶14

5. Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of F.I.R., charge sheet, summoning order and other documents, it is evident that the issue in question arises due to matrimonial dispute.

¶15

6. Issue notice to respondent no. 2.

¶16

7. List this case on 22.11.2024, on which date, applicant no. 1 and respondent no. 2 shall remain present before this Court.

¶17

8. Station House Officer, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Barabanki shall ensure the presence of respondent no. 2 before this Court on the next date.

¶18

9. Applicant no. 1 is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.40,000/- before the Senior Registrar of this Court within two weeks from today.

¶19

10. Till the next date of listing, no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicants.

¶20

11. In case, the applicant no. 1 fails to deposit the amount, as aforesaid, this interim order shall automatically stand vacated."

¶21

Learned counsel for the applicants informs that the applicant no.1 was unable to deposit sum of Rs. 40,000/- as ordered on 24.10.2024 due to financial crisis and today he requests that he is ready to deposit sum of Rs. 30,000/-.

¶22

However, client of learned counsel for the applicants, who is present today before this Court, again expressed his inability to deposit sum of Rs. 30,000/- and also requested for granting him further time in that regard.

¶23

Respondent no.2 is also present today before this Court along with Sub Inspector, namely, Mrs. Chanda Yadav. She expressed her willingness to join the company of applicant no.1. The applicant no.1 also narrated several complaints against her.

¶24

Therefore, this Court is of the view that as the order dated 24.10.2024 was not complied with regarding depositing the said amount as ordered, the applicants are not entitled to get any relief.

¶25

In view of above, the application is dismissed .

¶26

The trial Court is directed to conclude the proceedings of the case in question expeditiously without giving any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

¶27

Office is directed to communicate this order to learned trial Court, forthwith.

¶28

Order Date :- 22.11.2024 Arpan

¶29

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

Ravikar Verma and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravikar Verma and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Manju Devi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Shatrughan Dwivedi and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Omprakash @ O.P. Rawat @ Santosh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Anuj Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another

Shiv Bhagwan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Ramnewal and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another