HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 53 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 24484 of 2015 Applicant :- Smt. Saroj And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arshad Ullah Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Heard Sri Arshad Ullah, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Vikash Rana, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3769/9 of 2013 (Case Crime No. 126 of 2012) (State Vs. Vivek Verma & others including Charge Sheet No. 55 of 2013 dated 07.06.2013, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506, IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station, Mahila Thana, District Muzaffar Nagar.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the marriage between the applicant no.2 and sister of opposite party no.2 was solemnized in the year 2010.
After having very carefully examined, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants and perused the material brought on record, I find that so far as applicant no.2 (husband) is concerned, there is no justification for quashing the prosecution of the aforementioned case.
The prayer to that extent on behalf of applicant no.2, namely, Vivek Verma, is hereby refused.
However, it is directed that in case the applicant no.2 will appears and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
It is made clear that the applicant no.2 will not be granted any further time by this Court for surrendering before the Court below as directed above.
So far as applicant no. 1 namely Smt. Saroj are concerned, it has been contended by learned counsel for the applicants that she is mother of the applicant no.2, and the allegation levelled against her are wholly vague and no specific allegation has been levelled against them. Learned counsel for the applicants has placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Geeta Mehrotra vs. State of U.P. and others, reported in 2012 (10) ADJ 464.
Notice on behalf of opposite party no. 1 has been accepted by learned A.G.A.
Issue notice to opposite party no.2 returnable within four weeks at the address given in the application.
Opposite party no.2 may file counter affidavit within four weeks. Learned A.G.A. may also file counter affidavit within the same period. Rejoinder affidavit may thereafter be filed within two weeks.
List immediately after expiry of the aforesaid period before appropriate Bench.
Till the next date of listing, further proceedings of the aforesaid case shall remain stayed against applicant no. 1 namely Smt. Saroj.
Order Date :- 20.8.2015 VKG