KISHORI LAL PATHAK versus SMT. PHOOL KALI

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

---

Kishori Lal Pathak v. Smt. Phool Kali - APPLICATION U/s 482 No. 11948 of 1988 [2007] RD-AH 7504 (24 April 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).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court No.11

Criminal Misc. Application No.  11948 of  1988.

Kishori Lal Pathak and others Vs. Smt. Phool Kali

.......

Hon'ble V.D.Chaturvedi, J.

None is present for the petitioners even on the revision of the list. Perused the complaint which was filed for the offence under section 323/504/427 I.P.C. with the allegations that the petitioner Kishori objected for taking of water from hand pipe when the complainant Smt. Phool Kali (opposite party) was taking water from the hand pipe ; that an altercation took place between the opposite  party and Kishori ; that the other petitioners  also reached there and started beating the opposite party Smt. Phool Kali by kicks and fists ; that Babu Ram had beaten by lathi ; that in such incident the ear ring of the complainant Phool Kali fell down and lost somewhere, hence she sustained a loss of Rs. 500/-.

In the complaint there is no allegations that any of the petitioners  has taken away the ear ring of the complainant Phool Kali,  yet the petitioners were summoned  for offence under section 395 I.P.C. There is no injury report at all whereas the allegations are that accused persons have beaten the complainant by kicks and fists and Babu Ram has beaten her by lathi.  It is impossible  that several persons have beaten a lady and one person by lathi yet she sustained no injury. The summoning of the accused for offence under section 395 I.P.C. on the aforesaid allegations and in the absence of injury report is nothing but an abuse of the process.

On the basis of what has been discussed above, the petition is allowed and the proceedings  pending in the court below are quashed.

Dt. 24.4.2007

Sh  

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 |

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