SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Aashish Sharma And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 18 July, 2019


?Court No. – 66

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 35758 of 2017

Applicant :- Aashish Sharma And 2 Others

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Avanish Pratap Singh,Umair Mahmood

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

Heard Sri Avanish Pratap Singh, counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A.

The present application u/s 482 SectionCr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the order dated 30.5.2017 passed in Case no. 4240 of 2016, u/s 498A, 323, 504, 506 SectionI.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, (SectionSmt. Gunjan Sharma vs. Aashish Sharma and others), P.S. Chhatta, District Agra, pending in the court of A.C.J.M., court no. 9, Agra.

On the statement made by counsel for the applicants that an opportunity be given to parties for reconciliation / settlement of their dispute by way of mediation as they are willing to settle the matter through mediation, this Court vide order dated 2.11.2017 had referred the matter to the Mediation and Conciliation centre and the applicants were directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 15,000/- by way of demand draft in the name of Registrar General A/c, Allahabad High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre within a period of one months from today. It was also directed that if the aforesaid amount is not deposited by the applicants within the aforesaid period, the stay order shall automatically come to an end.

Deputy Registrar/In-charge, Mediation centre has submitted report that the applicants had not complied with the order dated 2.11.2017 and have not deposited the aforesaid amount, therefore, the notices were not sent to the parties by the Mediation centre.

In view of the aforesaid facts, it appears that the applicants have obtained stay order by misrepresentation of fact and infact they never wanted to settle their differences, even otherwise I have gone through the averments made in the complaint case in which there are specific allegation of demand of dowry and consequent torture to opposite party no. 2 and the same is prima facie established by the statement of opposite party no. 2 recorded u/s 200 and 202 SectionCr.P.C. based on which A.C.J.M., court no. 9, Agra had summoned the applicants to face trial. Prima facie, cognizable offence is made out against the applicants.

The instant application is bereft of merit and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.

Interim order, if any, stands vacated.

Office is directed to communicate the order to the court concerned immediately.

Order Date :- 18.7.2019




Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation