Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 287 (UTT)

KANHAIYA LAL DIKSHIT v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2015-05-29

SUDHANSHU DHULIA

body2015
JUDGMENT Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) 1. Mr. Deepak Sharma, Advocate, present for the applicant. 2. Mr. S.S. Adhikari, learned Brief Holder, learned Brief Holder, present for the State/respondent no.1. 3. Mr. Vivek Shukla, Advocate, present for the respondent no. 2. 4. An F.I.R. was lodged, inter alia, against the applicant under Case Crime No.298 of 2010, under Sections 498A of I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, at Police Station Ranipur District – Haridwar, in which after investigation police has filed charge sheet and now the applicant has received summons. Hence, the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 5. Admittedly, the applicant is not one of the relative of the husband. Therefore, the ingredients of Section 498A of I.P.C., which talks about the “husband or relative of husband”, is not made out as petitioner is admittedly neither the husband nor relative of the husband. Moreover, as per the F.I.R. there is no allegation of cruelty against the applicant, however, there is suggestion that he was also one of those persons who demanded dowry of Rs.5.00 Lakhs (Rupees Five Lakhs) and a car. The applicant is not the husband, nor he is the relative of husband, as he was the only mediator in the marriage, which was solemnized on 19.04.2009. 6. As against the present applicant, offence under Section 498A of I.P.C. is not made out. The proceedings of the trial court so far as it relates to Section 498A of I.P.C. against present applicant are hereby quashed. 7. Purely from the narration of F.I.R., prima facie, it can be said that an offence is made out only under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act against the present applicant, however, this has to be seen by the trial court. 8. However, since there is no allegation of actually giving of dowry, the offence of Section 3 of Dowry Prohibition Act are not made out. 9. Let the learned Magistrate proceed with the trial, however, liberty is given to the applicant to move an application for discharge in accordance with law. 10. As regards the offence under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, the applicant shall surrender before the trial court and apply for bail and the trial court considering the fact that the maximum punishment for this offence is two years, may consider granting bail the same day. 10. As regards the offence under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, the applicant shall surrender before the trial court and apply for bail and the trial court considering the fact that the maximum punishment for this offence is two years, may consider granting bail the same day. In case it is deferred for any reason, the trial court may consider granting interim bail to the applicant. 11. Since the trial is stalled since 2012, the learned Magistrate is hereby directed to proceed with the trial in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible without granting any undue adjournment to any of the parties.