MAHFOOZ Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MRS. Poonam Srivastava, J. Heard Sri Sunil Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned A. G. A. for the State.

(2.) THE respondent No. 2 filed a criminal complaint case No. 2783 of 2004 (Shabana v. Mahfooz Ali and Ors.), under Sections 323, 504, 506, I. P. C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act against the petitioners. It is submitted that the respondent No. 2 deliberately and intentionally concealed the fact and did not disclose the fact of divorce. However, the Court of Judicial Magistrate I, Bulandshahar vide order dated 4-8-2004 summoned the petitioners-accused to face the trial in respect of the aforesaid offences. An application under Section 245, Cr. P. C. was moved before the Magistrate for discharging the accused, which was dismissed vide order dated 20-2-2006. This order was challenged in Criminal Revision No. 114 of 2006 before the learned Sessions Judge, Bulandshahar, which also stands dismissed vide judgment and order dated 8-2-2007.

(3.) IN view of this, I am of the considered view that neither the Magistrate nor the learned Sessions Judge committed any error which warrants interference in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of INdia. The writ petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.