HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. – 72
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 35487 of 2019
Applicant :- Mohammad Waris And 2 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Kamala Devi Mishra,Prashant Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Rajiv Joshi,J.
Heard Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
Present application under Section 482, SectionCr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the summoning order dated 17.12.2018 passed by A.C.J.M., Court No.2, Allahabad in Complaint Case No. 8661 of 2018, under Sections 498A, Section323, Section504, Section506, SectionI.P.C. and 3/4 SectionDowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Naini, District Prayagraj (Allahabad).
The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that the complaint was filed on 25.9.2018. Subsequently, the statement of the complainant under Section 200, SectionCr.P.C. and her witnesses under Section 202, SectionCr.P.C. was recorded and summoning order was passed on 17.12.2018. It is further contended by learned counsel for the applicant that from the bare perusal of the complaint it is apparent that the applicants demanded Omni Car prior to two days of the marriage, which demand was fulfilled by the family of the wife. Subsequently, again the demand was raised. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the car in question was purchased by the husband on his own by taking loan from the bank and he is paying regularly the instalments for the same.
The contention so raised by learned counsel for the applicants cannot be taken into consideration at this stage as only the statement of the complainant as well as her witnesses has to be considered while taking cognizance under Section 204, SectionCr.P.C. I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the order summoning the accused persons under the aforesaid offence.
The application lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 25.9.2019
T. Sinha
