Santosh Kumar Das And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another
2013 Latest Caselaw 3660 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 44
 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 21010 of 2013
 

 
Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Das And 2 Others
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Chand
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

Heard Sri Ramesh Chand, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A.

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.117 of 2012 (Smt. Sangeeta Devi Vs. Santosh Kumar Das and others),  under Sections 498-A,323,504,506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, police station George Town, District Allahabad, pending  in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.10, Allahabad including the summoning order dated 4.6.2012 and the NBW dated 21.2.2013 issued against the applicants.

The marriage between applicant no.1 and opposite party no.2 was solemnized in the year 2007.

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.1, namely, Santosh Kumar (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.1 is hereby refused.

However, it is directed that in case the applicant no.1 appears and surrenders 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. 

For a period of 30 days from today, NBW issued against him shall be kept in abeyance.

It is made clear that the applicant no.1 will not be granted any further time by this Court for surrendering before the Court below as directed above.

So far as applicant nos.2 & 3, namely, Phool Chandra and Suraja Devi are concerned, it has been contended by learned counsel for the applicants that they are the family members of applicant no.1 and the allegation levelled against them 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 nos.2 & 3, namely, Phool Chandra and Suraja Devi.

Order Date :- 4.7.2013

NS