Basi Khan vs State Of U.P. And Another
2019 Latest Caselaw 6233 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 65
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 41045 of 2013
 

 
Applicant :- Basi Khan
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- M.C. Chaturvedi,Pradeep Kumar,Uma Nath Pandey
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Asha Parihar,Pradeep Chandra
 

 
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.

Heard Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri A.D. Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State.

The present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1639 (Dr. Muzaffar Ullah Khan Vs. Basi Khan and others), under Section 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Kotwali, Orai, District Jalaun as well as the order dated 19.1.2013 and 28.10.2013 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Jalaun at Orai.

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the occurrence happened in Delhi, while F.I.R. was lodged in this case in District Jalaun. Subsequently, a complaint case was filed by the opposite party no. 2 against the accused-applicants, whereon cognizance was taken by the trial court vide order dated 19.1.2013 summoning the accused-applicants under the above mentioned sections to face trial. The matter, thereafter, was referred to mediation centre for compromise between the parties but both the parties have apprised the court that compromise had failed between the parties and report to that effect is also on record. He has further argued that the bailable warrant has been issued against the accused-applicant.

Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has opposed the prayer for quashing of the entire proceedings.

Since compromise has failed between the parties and in this case the injury memo is also annexed and as per the complaint, the demand of dowry is made by the accused-applicant from opposite party no. 2, who is father of the victim, cognizable offence is found to be made out out against the accused-applicants, hence quashing is refused.

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of with a direction that if the accused-applicant appears before the trial court within three weks and moves an application for recall of the bailable warrant, the same may be considered in accordance with law and till three weeks no coercive action shall be taken against the accused-applicant.

Order Date :- 9.7.2019

A.P. Pandey