SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Greesh Chandra vs State Of U.P. And Another on 24 February, 2020


?Court No. – 29

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 7678 of 2020

Applicant :- Greesh Chandra

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Satendra Singh

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed by applicant namely Greesh Chandra with the request to quash the summoning order dated 7.12.2017 as well as entire proceeding of Criminal Complaint Case No.75 of 2017 (Shivram Singh Vs. Greesh Chandra), under Section 406 IPC, Police Station Navavganj, District Farrukhabad, pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Farrukhabad.

The submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that the complaint was filed by the opposite party no.2 to the effect that the marriage of his daughter was settled with the applicant and certain formalities were completed and he gave a payment of Rs. 2,11,000/-. Thereafter, the applicant made a demand for additional 10 lacs rupees car. The opposite party no.2 objected to it and refused. Thereafter, the money which was given was demanded but the applicant refused to pay back. Further submission is that the applicant has not got any job of teacher. It has been further submitted that the applicant has already been married and similarly the daughter of the opposite party no.2 has also been married with someone else. Further submission is that in the complaint itself it was stated that the marriage was settled on the basis of no dowry.

From the perusal of the impugned order and statements of the witnesses attached with this application, it appears that in support of the complaint, the complainant was examined under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and two witnesses namely Indresh Kumar and Smt. Poonam Devi were also examined. All the three witnesses supported the complaint allegations. Therefore, finding prima facie case being made out, the applicant was summoned for the offence under Section 406 IPC. The fact that in such kind of factual situation the offence under Section 406 IPC will be made out or not is a fact, which has to be considered by the learned trial Court at the stage of framing of charge where the applicant will have opportunity of hearing.

In view of the above discussions, I do not find any force in the application. The application is liable to be dismissed.

The present application is dismissed with the observations that in case the applicant appears before the learned court below within 30 days from today and gives bail application, his bail application shall be considered and disposed of in accordance with law, expeditiously preferably on the same day

For a period of 30 days, no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case but this protection shall not be extended in any case.

Order Date :- 24.2.2020




Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2022 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