HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Court No. – 28
Case :- U/S 482/378/407 No. – 5872 of 2019
Applicant :- Dheeraj
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Kushal Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon’ble Virendra Kumar-II,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been instituted for quashing the summoning order dated 09.07.2018 passed by the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 21, Sultanpur arising out of complaint case No. 1583 of 2017: Smt. Neelam Vs. Dheeraj, under Sections 498A I.P.C. and Section 3/Section4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Kurebhar, District Sultanpur and also quash the entire proceedings of the complaint case No. 1583 of 2017 pending before the Vth Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.21, Sultanpur.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been summoned to face trial vide order dated 09.07.2018 passed by the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 21, Sultanpur in complaint case No. 1583 of 2017: Smt. Neelam Vs. Dheeraj and others. He has further submitted that there was no specific evidence for summoning the accused persons for offence punishable under Section 498-A and Section 3/Section4 Dowry Prohibition Act. Therefore, summoning order and proceedings of complaint case be quashed.
4. I have perused the impugned order dated 09.07.2018 and found that in the copy of the impugned order annexed as Annexure no.1 to this petition, the complaint case number is written as 769/2017: Smt. Neelam Vs. Dheeraj, on the other hand, on the folio issued by the trial Court, the complainant case number is written as 1583/2017: Smt. Neelam Vs. Dheeraj.
5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed this petition by submitting that the trial Court has recorded statement of complainant under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and statement of PW-1 Urmila Tiwari and PW-2 Ram Krishna Tiwari under Section 202 Cr.P.C.. All the witnesses including the complainant has adduced evidence against the petitioner and co-accused persons that they harassed and tortured the victim/complainant for demand of dowry of amount of Rs. one lac, LED T.V. and washing machine. At this primary stage ex-parte evidence adduced by the complainant and her witnesses shall be considered and defence version of the accused persons would not be considered. The summoning order dated 09.07.2018 called for no interference. Therefore, the petition deserves to be dismissed. Factual aspects cannot be evaluated in proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
6. Accordingly, dismissed.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner further argued that some time may be granted to the petitioner for appearance before the trial Court. If, petitioner appear and move bail application before the trial Court within 15 days, then trial Court shall disposed of his bail application expeditiously according to exposition of law of this Court and Hon’ble Supreme Court.
8. In the meanwhile, learned trial Court shall not adopt any coercive methods against the petitioner.
Order Date :- 26.08.2019/Arvind
