Kishore Kumar And Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 3167 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 15
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 605 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Kishore Kumar And Others
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home, Lko. And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Waris Farooqui
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

Heard Sri Mohd. Waris Farooqui, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Diwaker Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed against the impugned order dated 1.11.2022 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C.-II Balrampur, whereby the application dated 13.05.2022 moved by the applicants under Section 239 Cr.P.C. for discharge of offences has been rejected.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the court below without considering the evidence on record and material brought before the court below rejected the application.

Learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Geeta Mehrotra Vs. State of U.P., (2012) 10 SCC 741 and has submitted that general allegation has been levelled against all the in-laws and they have no role.

Sri Diwaker Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State whereas opposed and submitted that the court below has rightly rejected the application of the discharge. The applicants only want to delay the proceedings of the court below. Once the mediation has already been failed, as per the directed issued by High Court in the Writ Petition No. 8113 (MB) 2021, it appears that the parties are not interested to get their dispute settled amicably. Thus, the court below after considering the entire evidence on record and after considering the material available before him, has rejected the discharge application, therefore, no case is made out to interfere in the impugned order.

Sri Diwaker Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State further submits that there is demand of dowry by all the accused named in the F.I.R. and causing cruetly to the opposite party No2, who is wife of applicant No.2. He further submits that the allegation is very serious and the judgment passed in Geeta Mehrotra's case (supra) is distinguishable on the fact of the present case.

After going through the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the impugned order, I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order. The court below has rightly rejected the discharge application, as there is allegation against the applicants regarding causing cruelty and demand of dowry and a serious allegation has been levelled. The entire incident was caused within seven years of marriage. The applicants are not entitled to get any indulgence by this Court.

Accordingly, the application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. lacks merit and is dismissed.

Order Date :- 31.1.2023

Arvind