SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Mahendra And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 24 February, 2020

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 29

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 7394 of 2020

Applicant :- Mahendra And 3 Others

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

Counsel for Applicant :- Vijai Kumar Tripathi

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.

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

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed by applicants namely Mahendra, Sanjay, Umesh @ Chandra Shekher and Gyatri with the request to quash the summoning order dated 27.9.2019 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kushinagar, Padrauna in Complaint Case No.1118 of 2017 (Ramesh Kushwaha Vs. Mahendra Kushwaha and others), under Section 406 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Padrauna, District Kushinagar, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kushinagar, Padrauna, by which the learned Magistrate has summoned the applicants for the offence under Section 406 IPC.

The submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that the complaint on the basis of which the applicants have been summoned, was given on false and there was no substance in it. The complainant has succeeded in getting the summoning order against the applicants whereas no marriage took place and the settlement of marriage was broken after engagement. There was no such demand from the side of the applicants but just to harass them, the complaint was filed.

After perusal of the record, it appears that the complaint was filed against the applicants and the complainant examined himself and two witnesses and all the three supported the complaint version and finding that a prima facie case was made out against the applicants, the impugned order was passed by the learned Magistrate.

It is not possible at this stage to enter into the factual controversy and it appears from the perusal of the impugned order and the statements attached with the application that all the three witnesses have supported the complaint version and denying on the same and finding prima facie case is made out. The applicants were summoned by the impugned order for the offence under Section 406 IPC.

As such, I do not find any force in the application and the application is liable to be dismissed.

The present application is dismissed with the observations that in case the applicants appear before the learned court below within 30 days from today and give bail application, their 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 applicants in the aforesaid case but this protection shall not be extended in any case.

Order Date :- 24.2.2020

Mini

 

 

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