SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Tapesh Kumar And Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 5 December, 2019

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 28

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 3765 of 2008

Applicant :- Tapesh Kumar And Others

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

Counsel for Applicant :- Akshaya Kumar

Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate

Hon’ble Rajeev Misra,J.

Case called out in the revised list. No one appears on behalf of the applicants to press this application. Learned A.G.A., representing opposite party No. 1 is present. No one appears on behalf of opposite party No. 2.

This application under Section 482 Cr. P. C., has been filed challenging summoning order dated 13.11.2007 passed by Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Bijnor, in Complaint Case No. 496 of 2007 (Smt. Asha Devi Vs. Tapesh Kumar and others), under Section 406 IPC, P.S. Kotwali City, District Bijnor as well as entire proceedings of the above mentioned complaint case.

Present application came up for consideration on 10.3.2008. This Court vide order dated 10.3.2008 referred the matter to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, High Court, Allahabad and also granted interim protection to the applicants. Applicants complied with the condition provided for in the order dated 10.3.2008. Consequently, notices were issued to the parties by Mediation and Conciliation Centre, High Court, Allahabad. Thereafter, Mediation and Conciliation Centre, High Court, Allahabad submitted a report dated 15.6.2008 stating therein that the parties are not willing for mediation as none appeared for mediation on any date. Consequently, the matter has now come up for consideration before this Court.

It is undisputed fact that the applicant No. 1 is husband of opposite party No. 2 and other applicants are relatives of the applicant No. 1.

Perused the affidavit filed in support of the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., In paragraph No. 7, it has been averred that all the applicants are living separately from each other. It has further been averred that the complaint filed by the opposite party No. 2 is against facts, law and justice. No offence is made out against the applicants.

None of the grounds raised by the applicants for quashing proceedings of the above mentioned complaint case are cogent enough for quashing the proceedings of above mentioned complaint case.

Admittedly, complaint filed by the opposite party No. 2 is maintainable before the court concerned and the court below has jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. Grounds raised by the applicants relate to the disputed defence of applicants which can be considered more appropriately at the time of trial.

No case for interference is made out. Consequently present application fails and is hereby dismissed.

Interim order granted earlier is, hereby, vacated.

Office is directed to communicate Court below about this order by FAX within 72 hours.

Order Date :- 5.12.2019

Jaswant

 

 

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.

STUDY REPORTS

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