Disposed¶16

Reetu Pal v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC3 Sept 2025NA529/3133/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

S.529 BNSS expedition direction, Allahabad High Court, Kaushambi; trial of Case No. 390 of 2021 (Case Crime No. 02 of 2021; Ss.498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC; Ss.3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Mahila Thana) to conclude preferably within six months; earlier S.482 Cr.P.C. quashing application (No. 6749 of 2023) dismissed on 10.05.2023 with recovery of Rs.50,000/- as arrears of land revenue; recovery kept in abeyance after part payment of Rs.25,000/- by husband Vinod Kumar Pal to wife Reetu Pal.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the court concerned to decide Case No. 390 of 2021 strictly in accordance with law, without unnecessary adjournments, preferably within six months of production of certified copy of the order if there is no legal impediment; recovery proceedings pursuant to the order dated 10.05.2023 kept in abeyance. ¶16

Reetu Pal vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether the Civil Judge (J.D.)/FTC-Ist/Judicial Magistrate, Kaushambi should be directed to decide Case No. 390 of 2021, State vs. Vinod Kumar and others, arising out of Case Crime No. 02 of 2021, within a stipulated period. +1 more

¶9

Court's answer

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the Court disposed of the application with a direction to the court concerned to decide Case No. 390 of 2021 strictly in accordance with law, without granting unnecessary adjournments to either party, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within six months from the date of production of a certified copy of the order, if there is no legal impediment.

¶16

Ratio / Principle

Any recovery proceedings initiated pursuant to the order dated 10.05.2023 passed by this Court in Application U/S 482 No. 6749 of 2023 shall remain in abeyance.

¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Application U/S 529 BNSS No. 3133 of 2025 (Allahabad High Court, Shekhar Kumar Yadav J., decided September 25, 2025): Applicant Reetu Pal prayed for issuance of a direction to the Civil Judge (J.D.)/FTC-Ist/Judicial Magistrate, Kaushambi to decide Case No. 390 of 2021, State vs. Vinod Kumar and others, arising out of Case Crime No. 02 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, within a stipulated period. Background: the husband (opposite party no. 2, Vinod Kumar Pal) had filed Application U/S 482 No. 6749 of 2023 seeking quashing of the charge sheet, summoning order and entire proceedings; vide order dated 07.04.2023 the Court directed him to hand over a demand draft of Rs. 50,000/- to the wife, and on non-compliance vide order dated 10.05.2023 dismissed the S.482 Cr.P.C. application and directed recovery of Rs. 50,000/- as arrears of land revenue. The husband having paid Rs. 25,000/-, the Court finally disposed of the application, directing decision of the case strictly in accordance with law without unnecessary adjournments, preferably within six months from production of a certified copy of the order if there is no legal impediment, and directing that recovery proceedings pursuant to the order dated 10.05.2023 remain in abeyance.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 529 BNSS No. - 3133 of 2025

¶3

Reetu Pal

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus
State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Bed Prakash Rai
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No.- 83

¶6

HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J.

¶7

Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 2 has been filed today by Mr. Pawan Shukla, Advocate, which is taken on record.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the record.

¶9

By means of this application, the only prayer made by the applicant is for issuance of a direction to the Civil Judge (J.D.)/FTC-Ist/Judicial Magistrate, Kaushambi, to decide Case No. 390 of 2021, State vs. Vinod Kumar and others, arising out of Case Crime No. 02 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station–Mahila Thana, District Kaushambi, within a stipulated period.

¶10

Earlier, the husband of the applicant, namely Vinod Kumar Pal, who is opposite party no. 2 in this case, had filed Application U/S 482 No. 6749 of 2023 seeking quashing of the charge sheet, summoning order, and entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 390 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 02 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Kaushambi. Vide order dated 07.04.2023, this Court directed the applicant (husband) and opposite party no. 2 (wife) to appear in person before the Court, and further directed the husband to prepare a demand draft of Rs. 50,000/- in the name of opposite party no. 2, to be handed over to her on the date of her first appearance as expenses. However, as the said order was not

¶11

NA529 No. 3133 of 2025

¶12

¶13

complied with, this Court, vide order dated 10.05.2023, dismissed the aforesaid application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and directed recovery of Rs. 50,000/- as arrears of land revenue from the applicant (husband) to be paid to opposite party no. 2 (wife).

¶14

Today, the husband of the applicant (wife) is present in person, duly identified by his counsel. It is contended by learned counsel for the husband that the husband, being a poor man, was unable to pay the amount earlier as directed by this Court, and there was no intention on his part to disobey the order. However, he has somehow managed to arrange Rs. 25,000/-, which has been paid to the applicant (wife) in the present matter. A request has been made that recovery proceedings pursuant to the order dated 10.05.2023 be kept in abeyance.

¶15

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that a sum of Rs. 25,000/- has been received in his account, and he assures the Court that the said amount shall be handed over to the applicant (wife) by tomorrow.

¶16

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the applicant's case, this application under Section 529 B.N.S.S. is finally disposed of with a direction to the court concerned to decide the aforesaid case strictly in accordance with law, without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.

¶17

It is further directed that any recovery proceedings initiated pursuant to the order dated 10.05.2023 passed by this Court in Application U/S 482 No. 6749 of 2023 shall remain in abeyance.

¶18

September 25, 2025 RavindraKSingh

¶19

(Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.)

¶20

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

Reetu Pal v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reetu Pal v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Arya Gautam Alias Raghav Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Mahendra vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd. Irfan and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Ajay @ Kanbahawa Garg vs State of U.P. and Another

Karan Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Arif vs State of U.P. and Another