SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Smt. Kalpana Sharma And 3 Ors vs State Of U.P. And Another on 21 October, 2019

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 72

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 11578 of 2018

Applicant :- Smt. Kalpana Sharma And 3 Ors

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another

Counsel for Applicant :- J.B. Singh

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajesh Yadav,Yadvesh Yadav

Hon’ble Rajiv Joshi,J.

Heard Sri J.B. Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Yadvesh Yadav on behalf of opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.

The present Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the impugned summoning order dated 20.12.2017 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Jewar, Gautam Budh Nagar in Complaint Case No. 411 of 2017 (Ved Prakash Vs. Ankit Dikshit and others), under Sections- 420, 465 SectionI.P.C., Police Station- Rabupura, District- Gautam Budh Nagar, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Jewar, Gautam Budh Nagar.

The record reflects that the opposite party no. 2- complainant, who is the father-in-law of the applicant no. 1 filed a complaint alleging that the son of the complainant, namely, Saurabh Sharma was married with the applicant no. 1 (Smt. Kalpana Sharma) on 27.11.2009; that subsequently, one baby girl was born out of their wedlock on 13.06.2011 but unfortunately, the son of the complainant died on 19.07.2011; that thereafter, his daughter-in-law had gone to her parental house with the newly born baby; that the daughter of the applicant no. 1, namely, Km. Sonu @ Tanvi was got admitted in the Oxford School where some fraud has been committed by the applicant mentioning the name of the guardians as Ankit Dixshit @ Ankit Sharma and Smt. Meenu Dixshit @ Meenu Sharma, who are not the real parents of the daughter. The learned Judicial Magistrate vide impugned order dated 20.12.2017 was summoned the applicants who are the daughter-in-law of the opposite party no. 2 and second husband namely Sri Hariom Sharma of the applicant no. 1, while applicant nos. 3 4, are the brother and sister-in-law of the applicant no. 1.

Contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that from the bare perusal of the complaint no offence against the applicants under Section 420, Section465 I.P.C. is made out. The report card and birth certificate of the minor girl have been appended in the supplementary affidavit as well as application at Page no. 40 for the Academic Session 2017-18.

From the bare perusal of the said certificate, it is apparent that the name of the parents of the minor girl has been recorded/reported as Late Saurabh Sharma Smt Kalpana Sharma.The said document has not been denied in the counter affidavit.

It is further contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the present criminal proceedings initiated by the opposite party no. 2, who is the grand father of the minor is wholly malicious, inasmuch as, the present applicants have not committed any offence so as to deprive the minor of her share in any property and therefore, no offence is disclosed against the applicants under Section 420, Section465 I.P.C..

I have considered the argument so raised by the learned counsel for the applicants and perused the record.

From the bare perusal of the complaint, the statement of the complainant under Section 200 Cr.P.C., his witnesses and considering the documents appended with the supplementary affidavit i.e., birth certificate of the minor daughter as well as her report card in respect of the Academic Session Year 2017-18, it is clear that no offence under Sections 420, Section465 I.P.C. is made out against the applicants.

The present proceedings which have been initiated by the father-in-law of the applicant no. 1, appears to be nothing but a malicious prosecution and is an abuse to the process of law as the opposite party no. 2 has already lost his claim under Section 25 of the Guardians and SectionWards Act, vide judgment and order dated 31.03.2017 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Gautam Budh Nagar, copy of which is annexure-4 to the present application.

In view of the above, continuance of the proceedings of the aforesaid case are not sustainable in the eyes of the law and the same are hereby quashed.

The application stands allowed.

Order Date :- 21.10.2019

Shivangi

 

 

Leave a Reply

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

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