SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Usman And Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 8 January, 2020

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 28

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 6088 of 2008

Applicant :- Usman And Others

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

Counsel for Applicant :- P.S. Pundir

Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate

Hon’ble Rajeev Misra,J.

Heard Mr. Rahul Singh Tomar, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. P.S. Pundir, learned counsel for applicants. Learned A.G.A. representing opposite party No. 1 is present.

This application under Sectionsection 482 Cr. P. C. has been filed challenging charge sheet dated 28.07.2007 submitted in Case Crime No. 585 of 2007, under Sectionsections 498-A, Section323 IPC and Section 3/Section4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Mandi, District Saharanpur resulting in Case No. 5770 of 2007 (State Vs. Usman and others), under Sections 498A, Section323 I.P.C., P.S. Mandi, District Saharanpur as well as entire proceedings of above mentioned case pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate I, Saharanpur.

Present application came up for admission on 28.3.2008, whereby this Court referred the matter to Mediation and Conciliation Centre, High Court, Allahabad and also granted interim protection to applicants. Applicants complied with the conditions contained in order dated 28.3.2008. Consequently, notices were issued by Mediation and Conciliation Centre, High Court, Allahabad to the parties. However, no one appeared before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, High Court, Allahabad. As such no settlement could be arrived at between the parties. Consequently, Mediation and Conciliation Centre, High Court, Allahabad has submitted a report dated 20.09.2008 stating therein that no one has appeared before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, High Court, Allahabad, as such no agreement could be arrived at between the parties. Consequently, matter has now come up before this Court.

It may be noted that on account of interim order dated 28.3.2008, proceedings of above mentioned case have remained stayed for more than 11 years.

Learned counsel for applicants could not point out any illegality in the charge sheet submitted in above noted case crime number.

It is well settled that charge sheet can be challenged only on limited grounds namely criminal proceedings are not maintainable or Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the same. None of the aforesaid grounds are attracted in the present case. Consequently, present application fails and is, hereby dismissed.

Interim order dated 28.03.2008 is, hereby, vacated.

Order Date :- 8.1.2020

HSM

 

 

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