1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Shami Alias Shamiuddin vs State Of Up And Another

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|26 April, 2019
Court No. - 64
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16687 of 2019 Applicant :- Shami Alias Shamiuddin Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Waseem Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record.
By way of the instant application, the applicant has sought for quashment of the impugned order dated 25.2.2019 passed by the learned VIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Bareilly in Criminal Revision no. 504 of 2018 (Sami alias Samiuddin Vs. State of U.P. and another) and also the impugned order dated 27.9.2016 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Faridpur district Bareilly in complaint case no. 141 of 2016( Haseen Be Vs. Nafees Mohammad and others) under section 498A,323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. and section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act P.s. Faridpur district Bareilly pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Faridpur district Bareilly.
Upon consideration of various aspect of the matter, contention raised is that the applicant failed to elaborate his relationship with the husband O.P. No. 2, no specific relationship has been disclosed with the husband of O.P. No.2. Both the courts below without heeding to that particular aspect have justified the summoning. The summoning order initially passed by the concerned magistrate on 27.9.2016 thereafter confirmed by the concerned lower revisional court by order dated 28.2.2019.
I have also perused the two orders passed by the courts below. There is no perversity or illegality at this stage. Mere allegation and the statement of the complainant will be taken together which if reflect prima facie ground for summoning the applicant, then the court of the first instance was justified in summoning the applicant and it was upto the applicant to have appeared before the courts below and to set up his defence as to what relationship he has with the husband of O.P. No. 2. In case, he sets up such defence, then the courts below is duty bound to look into it and pass appropriate order on merit. No interference is required in for far as the summoning order is concerned.
The applicant is expected to seek discharge for which applicant can move a proper application within a period of two weeks from today. In case, such application is moved, it shall be expeditiously considered and disposed of.
With this observation/direction the application under section 482 Cr.P.C. Is disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.4.2019 N.A.
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
  • Arvind Kumar Mishra I
  • Mohammad Waseem