Smt. Sarvesh vs State Of U.P. And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 20082 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 84
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26946 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Smt. Sarvesh
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Vikas Srivastava
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

The applicant, wife of opposite party No.2, is summoned along with two other co-accused in Complaint Case No. 773 of 2018 (Vipin Kumar Sharma vs. Smt. Sarvesh) under Sections 326, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S.- Kakod, District- Bulandshahar, pending before Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahar on basis of a complaint lodged by opposite party No.2 (complainant) wherein his statement was recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. as well as statement of witnesses were recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C. and impugned summoning order was passed after considering medical report on record also.

Sri Mohd. Saqir holding brief of Sri Vikas Srivastava, learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant before this Court is wife of opposite party No.2 who has earlier lodged F.I.R. against him wherein after investigation charge sheet has been filed against him and only in order to put pressure and as a counterblast, abovereferred complaint was filed, therefore, entire proceedings be quashed.

In order to consider above submissions, I have carefully perused, complaint, statement of witnesses and impugned order and other material on record.

The relationship between applicant and opposite party No.2 is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that prior to this complaint, opposite party No.2 is facing trial on basis of F.I.R. lodged by applicant in year 2015. Therefore, present complaint which was lodged in 2018 does not qualify to be a case of counterblast as there is a gap of three years.

Further in order to meet out requirement of a requisite opinion as required under Section 204 Cr.P.C. that there are sufficient grounds to proceed against applicants in light of judgment of Lalankumar Singh vs. State of Maharashtra, 2022 SCC Online SC 1383, I have carefully perused impugned order wherein learned trial Court, after taking note of allegations made in complaint as well as statement recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. has also taken note of injury report of complainant, specifically the nature of injury no.4 which was caused by a sharp object as well as other injuries which were caused by hard and blunt object.

In these circumstances, there is no ground to disturb the opinion of learned Magistrate that there are sufficient grounds to proceed against applicants for offence under Sections, 326, 504, 506 I.P.C.

Accordingly, application being sans merit is rejected.

Order Date :- 6.12.2022

Nirmal Sinha

(26/329 fresh cases)