Criminal miscellaneous application seeking quashing of a chargesheet, summoning order and trial proceedings arising from a complaint alleging the applicant took money and jewellery and left with a co-accused. The court found the magistrate had applied judicial mind and dismissed the application.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
| No | Date | Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures |
COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS |
|---|---|---|---|
| C-528 No. 884 of 2026 Hon’ble Alok Mah r a, J. Mr. Umanshu Singh Jolly, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Ms. Pushpa Bhatt, learned D.A.G. alongwith Mr. S.C. Dumka, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The present criminal misc. application is filed with a prayer to quash and set-aside the chargesheet, summoning order as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 557 of 2025, Praveen Kumar Vs. Smt. Nidhi and Others, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st, Roorkee, District Haridwar. 4. In this case, a complaint was filed by the respondent no. 2 wherein, it is alleged that when he went to the office, his wife took Rs. 23,450/ - and some jewellery amounting of Rs. 1 Lakh from the house and went with the co-accused Sanjay Sharma. After investigation, chargesheet was also filed against his wife Nidhi and Sanjay Sharma. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and she has falsely been implicated in the case and there is no evidence as such against the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant would further submit that the learned Judicial Magistrate concerned, without application of mind, has passed the summoning order dated 13.01.2025. 6. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the record. 7. Perusal of the impugned summoning order dated 13.01.2025 reveals that the evidence collected was placed before the learned court below, which, after applying its judicial mind, has rightly summoned the applicant to face the trial. 8. The court concerned has considered & |
| discussed all rele | vant aspects. Thus, the view |
|---|---|
| taken by the concerned cannot find any infirmity |
learned Judicial Magistrate be faulted. This Court does not or illegality in the impugned |
| summoning order |
dated 13.01.2025 passed by |
| the court of lea | rned Judicial Magistrate 1st, |
| Roorkee, District 557 of 2025, Prav |
Haridwar in Criminal Case No. een Kumar Vs. Smt. Nidhi and |
| Others. Hence, t reason to interfere |
his Court does not find any with the impugned order. |
| 9. Accordingly, fails and is hereby Ujjwal |
the criminal misc. application dismissed. ( Alok Mah r a J.) 04.05.2026 |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the summoning order dated 13.01.2025 and chargesheet in Criminal Case No. 557 of 2025 should be quashed for want of application of mind.
Smt. Nidhi
Praveen Kumar
Alok Mahra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
