KHURSHID ALAM AND OTHERS Vs. BABY SHAEEN
LAWS(UTN)-2013-6-124
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on June 26,2013

Khurshid Alam And Others Appellant
VERSUS
Baby Shaeen Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Alok Singh, J. - (1.) Present petition is filed assailing the summoning order dated 14.01.2013 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ramnagar, District Nainitai, whereby learned Magistrate was pleased to summon the petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 498-AI.P.C. and Dowry Prohibition Act.
(2.) Brief facts of the present case, inter alia, are that respondent preferred an application under Section 156 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code against the petitioners in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ramnagar, stating therein that marriage of the petitioner No. 1 and respondent was solemnized on 2nd April, 2009 as per Muslim rites and ceremonies; father of the complainant has given household articles, utensils, furniture, double bed and jewelry at the time of marriage and also got deposited INR 2 lacs in the saving bank account of the complainant; petitioners were not happy with the articles given by the father of the petitioner at the time of marriage; petitioners told the complainant that they agreed for marriage of petitioner No.1 with the respondent, with hope that huge dowry would be given since father of the complainant was a Government Servant; petitioner No.1 (husband) took the A.T.M. card of the complainant and started withdrawing money from the saving bank account of the complainant by using her A.T.M. card; in the month of August, 2012, petitioner demanded INR 8, 60, 000/-to purchase the Xylo Car and told if cash was not available finance to purchase the Car could be arranged: father of the complainant told the petitioners that he was not in such a financial position to purchase the Xylo Car, on this, petitioners got annoyed and started abusing father of the complainant; on 01.11.2012, petitioners asked the complainant as to what happened to the Xylo car; on this, complainant told the petitioners, that her father was not present at home; hearing this, she was beaten up by the petitioner No.1 and his mother.
(3.) Learned Magistrate, treating the application under Section 156 (3) Criminal Procedure Code as complaint, and after recording the statement of the complainant as well as father of the complainant, pleased to pass impugned summoning order. Feeling aggrieved, petitioners have invoked inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.