Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 301 (UTT)

SRINIWAS ATRY v. GOMTI MISHRA

2016-07-01

SUDHANSHU DHULIA

body2016
JUDGMENT Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) 1. In this case, a complaint has been moved by the respondent – Smt. Gomti Mishra under Sections 452/323/504/506 of I.P.C. against the accused persons (including the present applicants) before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar. After recording the statement of the complainant under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. and witnesses under Section 202 of Cr.P.C., the learned Magistrate has issued summons under Sections 147/452/323 of I.P.C. vide order dated 16.04.2013. Aggrieved by the said summoning order the applicants preferred revision before the learned Session Judge, Haridwar, which was ultimately dismissed vide order dated 28.01.2014. Hence the applicants have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 2. Heard Mr. Narendra Bali, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the respondent and perused the records. 3. The allegation against the present applicants is that they have entered into the house of the complainant and committed Marpeet with the son of the complainant. Now the matter is pending in the court of 1st Additional Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that since the applicants did not appear before the trial court, hence non-bailable warrants have been issued against them. 4. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case as well as the fact that the applicants are not appearing before the court below to face the trial, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter, as far as the proceedings are concerned. The proceedings shall go on before the court below, in accordance with law. There is also no abuse of process of court, which may call for any interference in the present matter. 5. However, in case, the applicants surrender before the court below within ten days from today, and moves an application for their bail before the learned Magistrate concerned, the same shall be considered as far as possible on the same day itself. It is made clear that the non-bailable warrants issued against the applicants shall be kept in abeyance only for a period of ten days. Further the applicants will be at liberty to raise all legal and factual submissions before the court below at an appropriate stage. 6. Accordingly, the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. stands disposed.