Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

LALJI SETH & OTHERS versus SMT.MADHU VERMA

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Lalji Seth & Others v. Smt.Madhu Verma - APPLICATION U/s 482 No. 6194 of 1992 [2007] RD-AH 7902 (27 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.  6194 of 1992

Lal Ji Seth and others Vs. Smt. Madhu Verma

........

Hon'ble V.D.Chaturvedi, J.

The case is taken up in the revised list. The petitioner's counsel was elevated to this bench. Notices were issued to the petitioner which were served upon them as reported by the office on 19.9.2005. No counsel is present for the petitioners.

I have heard the learned A.G.A.

This is a petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 177 of 1991 State Vs. Rajendra Prasad and others.

Smt. Madhu Verma lodged an F.I.R. against Rajendra Prasad and the petitioners Nos. 1, 2 and 3 and also against the wife of Chhotey Lal  that they demanded Rs. 1 lakh and a new Maruti Car in dowry and on failing to fulfil the demand they started practising cruelty upon the complainant Madhu Verma; that on 24.8.90 the complainant husband Rajendra Prasad and petitioner Nos. 1,2 and 3 reached at the paternal house of the complainant and threatened that they will take with them the children of the complainant but would not permit  the complainant to enter in the house  unless their demands are fulfilled.

The marriage of the complainant was held in 1977. In complaint there is no mention of any date or the period when the petitioners and other started practising cruelty upon the complainant. The only dates given in the complaint are regarding the incident dated 12.6.1990, 13.6.90 and 28.8.90.

Regarding the incident dated 12.6.1990 it is stated that accused persons have misbehaved with the members of her paternal family when they reached Jaunpur. Regarding incident dated 13.6.90 it is stated that she was brought at her paternal house by the members of her paternal family. Regarding the incident dated 24.8.90 it is stated that Rajendra Prasad (husband), Kalawati (mother -in -law), Lal Ji Seth (father- in- law) and Chhotey Lal (the elder brother of father- in -) reached at the complainant's house at 9.10 P.M. and threatened that they would teach a lesson to the complainant and they would take with them the children of the complainant leaving the complainant at her paternal house because their demands were not fulfilled.

Regarding the incident dated 24.8.90 there is no allegation against the petitioner no.4 Smt. Ramwati Devi wife of Sri Chhotey Lal.

The incident dated 12.6.90 and 13.6.90 show that no cruelty was practiced upon the complainant on these dates. Regarding the other cruelty practiced upon the complainant  the dates of the incident are not stated. The cognizance cannot be taken for the incidents taken beyond 3 years back.

The perusal of the complaint shows that on the above mentioned dates  no threat was given to kill the complainant. The summoning of petitioner no.4 Smt. Ramwati, for want of allegations of cruelty practiced upon the complainant within 3 years, is quashed. The petition so far as it relates to petitioner Nos. 1,2 and 3 is dismissed.

However, it is directed that no coercive measures unless these are found expedient, will be taken against the petitioner Nos. 1, 2 and 3 who are neither present nor represented by any counsel.

The petition is disposed of with the above observations.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       Dt.27.4.2007

Sh


Copyright

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

Advertisement

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.