Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Smt. Bitoli & Others v. State Of U.P. & Another - APPLICATION U/s 482 No. - 9469 of 2006 [2007] RD-AH 15774 (19 September 2007)

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).



Criminal Misc. Application No. 9469 of 2006

Smt. Bitoli and others Vs. State of U.P. and another

Hon'ble R.K.Rastogi,J

This is an application under section 482 Cr. P.C. for quashing the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2372/2004, Ashok Kumar Vs. Ram Sanehi and others pending before the J.M. Sadar Farrukhabad under sections 403/506 I.P.C.

The facts relevant for disposal of this application under section 482 Cr.PC. are that the applicant no. 1 Smt. Bitoli is wife of opposite party no. 2 Ashok Kumar .Their marriage had taken place on 6.6.2002. The applicant no. 1 had moved an application before the S.S.P. Kanped a complaint against his wife Smt. Bitoli , her father, mother and four brothers with these allegations that Suresh the brother of Bitoli had borrowed a sum of Rs. 40000/- from him about one year ago . On 5.3.03 the father , brother and mother of Bitoli came to his house and asked him to perform Bida stating that the marriage of younger sister of Bitoli is going to take place . They also asked that the entire ornaments and clothes should be given to them at the time of marriage and in this way they took all ornaments and clothes asRaghunath Kishore Rastogi well as cash amounting to Rs. 75000/- .The ornaments of the complainant's sister in law ( Bhabhi) were also given at that time . Thereafter when he went to the house of the accused for Bidai of Bitoli, they refused to perform Bida and they did not return the ornaments and cash stating that they had purchased a field after selling ornaments. When he again made his demand for return of ornaments they asked him to pay Rs. 60000/- so that the ornaments may be got released and then they will be returned. He had also come to know that the accused wanted to perform second marriage of Bitoli after taking money. He, therefore, went to the police station to lodge F.I.R. and when the police did not lodge his report, he moved an application to the S.S.P. Farrukhabad, but no action was taken, then he filed this complaint under sections 403/506 I.P.C. Since the accused did not appear before the court, orders for issuing non bailable warrants were passed. Aggrieved with these orders, this application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed.

In this case, notice was sent to the opposite party no. 2 Ashok Kumar, but in spite of personal service of notice no counter affidavit was filed on his behalf . Learned A.G.A. also states that since it is a private compliant, the State does not propose to file any counter affidavit.

I have heard the learned counsel for the applicants and have perused the file of the case.

The applicants have filed affidavit of Ram Sanehi , father of applicant no. 1 who has denied the entire complaint allegations on oath .Since no counter affidavit has been filed, there is no reason to disbelieve the assertions made in the affidavit of Ram Sanehi.

Learned counsel for the applicants further submitted that the complaint of the complainant Ashok Kumar is counter blast of the action of Smt. Bitoli who had moved an application before the S.S.P. Kanpur Nagar on 26.2.2004 and had moved application under section 125 Cr.P.C. before the J.M. Ist Kanpur Nagar on 10.5.2004. Any how when the assertions made in the affidavit in support of the application under section 482 Cr.P.C. have not been controverted, there is no reason to disbelieve that affidavit.

Under these circumstances, continuance of such complaint would amount to abuse of the process of the court. I , therefore, allow this application and quash the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2372/2004, , Ashok Kumar Vs Ram Sanehi and others pending before the J.M. Sadar Farrukhabad under sections 403/506 I.P.C.




Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.