Dismissed

Suresh Chand v. State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Rajasthan HC15 Jan 2020CRLMP/1360/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal miscellaneous petition, the petitioner challenged the dismissal of his revision petition against the order of taking cognizance by the Judicial Magistrate in a dowry case. The bench found no merit in the petition and dismissed it, upholding the magistrates order.

What did the court decide?

The criminal miscellaneous petition was held devoid of merit and was accordingly dismissed.

Suresh Chand Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Rajasthan HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.1360/2017

¶3

Suresh Chand S/o Shri Bhambal Ram B/c Meena, aged about 40 years, R/o Jharda Ki Haveli, Tankhirkidi, Police Station And Tehsil Todabheem, Distt. Karauli Raj.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan Through Pp

¶7

Smt. Mukeshi D/o Lohderam B/c Meena, R/o Machdi, Police Station Todabheem, Distt. Karauli Raj.

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : None present. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Fateh Ram Meena, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

¶11

Order

¶12

15/01/2020

¶13

This petition is pending since 2017 whereby the petitioner has challenged the order dated 2.2.2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2 Hindaun City, District Karauli whereby he has dismissed the revision petition filed against the order of taking cognizance dated 24.7.2015 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Todabheem District Karauli in case no.237/2015 and allowed the petition. Cognizance was taken under Section 498A and 323 IPC as against the petitioner.

¶14

This case has been listed several times before the court but no one has appeared. Ultimately an application was moved for early listing but no one has appeared again after the same was allowed. It appears that the husband and wife were counseled and they were asked to stay together. However, after having entered

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

[CRLMP-1360/2017]

¶17

into compromise, again issues have arisen between them and there is a demand of dowry as alleged by the complainant. Allegations are also of beating her. In these circumstances, taking into consideration her statement made, learned Magistrate has taken cognizance under Section 498A and 323 IPC.

¶18

In the opinion of this court, the learned Magistrate has passed the order on the statement made under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. before it and also taken into consideration the other relevant facts which have come on record as per the final report submitted by the Investigating Officer.

¶19

Keeping in view aforesaid, this court does not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Magistrate which has been upheld in revision.

¶20

The criminal misc. petition is devoid of merit and the same is accordingly dismissed.

¶21

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J

¶22

Karan Bhutani /531/23

Suresh Chand v. State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Chand v. State of Rajasthan and Anr.

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

Nandlal Vs State

Dr. Kanwardeep Randhawa D/O Late M.S. Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Kailash Ram Godara S/O Shri Ganesh Ram Godara Vs State of Rajasthan

Suresh Kumar Vs Prabhati Lal and Anr.

Narendra Jain S/O Sh. Kapoor Chand Jain B/C Jain Vs State of Rajasthan

Ashish Kumar Sharma S/O Suresh Chand Sharna Vs Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited