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


Jai Bhagwan And Others v. State Of U.P. And Another - APPLICATION U/s 482 No. 9508 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 7323 (12 December 2005)


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).


Hon'ble M. K. Mittal, J.

Heard Sri Sanjay Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants,  learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the proceedings of Complaint Case No. 520 of 2005 under Sections 498 Am 406 IPC, P.S. Sahibabad, District Ghaziabad, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, C.B.I., Ghaziabad.

Brief facts are that opposite party no. 2 filed an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. against the applicants on 27.1.2005 but that application was rejected by the learned Magistrate by order dated 18.2.2005. Thereafter the complainant filed a complaint on 23.2.2005 and learned Magistrate after examining the complainant and the witnesses directed to summon the accused persons vide order dated 7.5.2005. Feeling aggrieved this application has been filed.

The contention of the learned counsel for the accused applicants is that complainant concealed the fact of having filed earlier application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and that the allegation as made are also inherently improbable. Although complainant did not mention about the earlier Application filed under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. but only on this ground the criminal proceedings cannot quashed. As far as the allegations are concerned, the complainant and the statements of the witnesses prima facie show that there are allegations  of demand of dowry and harassment against the applicants. This objection are factual in nature and can be taken by the applicants in the Trial Court at appropriate stage.

In the circumstances, I do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned order and the criminal proceedings cannot be quashed at this stage. Application is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.

Application is hereby dismissed.

Dated: 12.12.2005



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.