NyayAI Legal Knowledge Graph — Public Judgment & Act Pages (validation build, unlisted)

C482/255/2013 of SMT. PRAKASH RANI Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANR

Court
Uttarakhand High Court
Decision date
2013-03-19
Case number
4546 of 2012

Parties

Cites (1 resolved of 2 detected)

Statutes cited (2)

Full text

solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus

Show all Header

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL-Criminal Misc. Application (C482) No. 255 of 2013

Smt. Prakash Rani

…………. Applicant

versus

State of Uttarakhand & another

…………. Respondents

Mr. Vipul Sharma, Advocate for the applicant-petitioner. Mr. P.S. Saun, AGA for respondent no. 1.

Hon’ble U.C. Dhyani, J.

By way of this application, moved under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the applicant seeks to quash the charge sheet No. 257 of 2012 under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 of IPC and ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act. prayer has also been made to quash the summoning order dated 17.11.2012, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 of IPC and ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act in Criminal Case No. 4546 of 2012, state vs. Mukesh Arora and another.

2) Since learned counsel for the applicant did not press the main relief and therefore, the application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is dismissed summarily at the threshold. That is also the reason that no notice is being issued to respondent no. 2.

3) Thereafter, learned counsel for the applicant prayed that the court below be directed to dispose of the bail application of the applicant at an early date and

preferably on the same day. It is submitted that applicant Smt. Prakash Rani is mother-in-law of the victim. Learned counsel for the applicant drew attention of this Court towards the ruling of Preeti Gupta and another vs. State of Jharkhand and another, (2010) 7 SCC 667, whereby it was held by Hon’ble Apex Court that the tendency of implicating the husband and all his immediate relatives is not uncommon. The allegations levelled against the applicant are under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 of IPC and ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act. It is pointed out by learned counsel for the applicant that the allegations are general and sweeping in nature and no specific role has been assigned to the mother-in-law (present applicant). It is also brought to the notice of this Court that Mukesh Arora, the husband of the victim has surrendered before the court below and has been granted bail.

4) It is therefore directed that if the applicant Smt. Prakash Rani, who is mother-in-law of the victim, surrenders before the court below and seeks bail, her bail application shall be disposed of by learned Magistrate, preferably on the same day.

(U.C. Dhyani, J.)

Dt. March 19, 2013. Negi