SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Lunika vs State Of Rajasthan on 21 August, 2019

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
JODHPUR

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 4364/2019

Sudhir Deshpande anr

—-Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan

—-Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 4365/2019
Lunika

—-Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan

—-Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr H.M. Saraswat for petitioner
Sudhir Deshpande Smt Sucheta
Ms Rekha Sankhla for petitioner Smt
Lunika
For Respondent(s) : Mr Mahipal Bishnoi, PP

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE G.R. MOOLCHANDANI

Order

21/08/2019

Cr. Misc. Petition No.4364/2019

It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner

that the disputing couple had married in the year 2003 and they

are having kids of 13 and 12 years of age. Owing to estranged

relations, the couple was residing separately in Mumbai, both

petitioners being father-in-law and mother-in-law are residents of

Pune and have not committed any offence despite they are being

dragged falsely and have been arrayed as co-accused persons in

FIR lodged by she-spouse Smt Somya Deshpande, for the offence

punishable under Sections 498A, Section406 IPC, both the petitioners are

(Downloaded on 28/08/2019 at 11:30:59 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLMP-4364/2019]

at advanced stage of their age and are senile persons and are

very much ready to join the investigation; so their arrest be

checked.

Heard and perused material available on record and gone

through the contents of the FIR impugned.

Let notices be issued to respondents.

Notices qua respondent No.1 are accepted by learned Public

Prosecutor, so notices be sent to respondent No.2 only returnable

by four weeks’ time.

Meanwhile and until further orders, no coercive action shall

be taken against petitioners, namely Shri Sudhir Deshpande s/o

Gajanan and Smt Sucheta w/o Sudhir Deshpande.

Petitioners are mandated to join the investigation and

cooperate with the investigating agency.

List accordingly.

Cr. Misc. Petition No.4365/2019

It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner

that petitioner Smt. Lunika is a neighbour of the couple, she has

nothing to do with matrimonial affair between the couple despite

her name has falsely been implicated, alleging her to be a

paramour though she is a respectable married lady and has not

committed any offence pertaining to alleged cruelty.

In connected Cr. Misc. Petition No.4364/2019 it has been

argued that the couple had married in the year 2003 and they are

having grown children of 13 and 12 years of age.

Considering the facts circumstances and the material

available on record, petitioner is directed to join investigation.

(Downloaded on 28/08/2019 at 11:30:59 PM)

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-4364/2019]

Notices are accepted by learned Public Prosecutor qua

respondent No.1, so notices be issued to respondent No.2 only,

returnable by four weeks’ time.

Meanwhile and until further orders, no coercive action shall

be taken against petitioner Smt. Lunika w/o Samrat Lakhani as

well.

List accordingly.

(G.R. MOOLCHANDANI),J

179-180 MMA/-

(Downloaded on 28/08/2019 at 11:30:59 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 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