SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Smt. Anuradha vs State Of U.P. And Another on 3 March, 2020


?Court No. – 82

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 8533 of 2020

Applicant :- Smt. Anuradha

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

Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Dubey

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the impugned summoning order dated 20.1.2017 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar in Complaint Case No. 1950 of 2015, Anuradha Vs. Hari Shankar, under section 406 IPC, P.S. Modi Nagar, District Ghaziabad by which only one accused namely Hari Shankar has been summoned as well as revisional order dated 16.1.2020 passed by learned Additional Session Judge, Court No. 4, Ghaziabad in Criminal Revision No. 73 of 2017 (Smt. Anuradha Vs. State of U.P. and others).

It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has filed complaint against her husband Hari Shankar, mother-in-law Smt. Indarbala, Jeth Boby and Jethani Smt. Meenu but the learned Magistrate has summoned only the husband of applicant namely Hari Shankar under section 406 IPC vide order dated 20.1.2017. The applicant has preferred criminal revision no. 73 of 2017 against the order dated 20.1.2017 to summon the other co-accused but the learned revisional court has dismissed the revision of applicant vide its judgment and order dated 16.1.2020. It has further been submitted that offence under section 406 IPC is also made out against O.P. Nos. 3 to 5 namely Smt. Indarbala, Boby and Smt. Meenu but the learned Magistrate has not summoned the O.P. Nos. 3 to 5. The judgment and orders of courts below are not in accordance with law.

A perusal of the record shows that applicant has filed a complaint with the allegation of demand of dowry against O.P. Nos. 2 to 5 and also stated that O.P. Nos. 2 to 5 ousted her from their house and have not returned Stridhan of applicant. The learned Magistrate after considering the facts and circumstances of the case has summoned only the husband of applicant namely Hari Shankar to face trial under section 406 IPC against which the applicant has preferred criminal revision which was also dismissed by the lower revisional court.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned judgment and orders of courts below. The application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed.

Accordingly, the application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed.

Order Date :- 3.3.2020




Leave a Reply

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

Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.


Copyright © 2021 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