MANISHA @ RANU Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Application, under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, has been filed by Smt. Manisha @ Ranu, against State of U.P. and others, challenging the order dated 30.5.2018, passed in the Complaint Case No. 1299 of 2017, Smt. Manisha vs. Vivek Kumar and others, under Section 498-A, 406, 323, 504 and 506 of Indian Penal Code, Police Station-Mahila Thana, District Jhansi, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate-I, Jhansi as well as order of the Revisional Court, dated 15.5.2019, passed in Criminal Revision No. 131 of 2018, Smt. Manisha vs. State of U.P. and others, passed by the Court of Additional District & Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Dacoity Affected Area, Jhansi, with a prayer for allowing this application and quashing of impugned order, dated 30.5.2018 in above Complaint Case No. 1299 of 2017, as well as order of the Revisional court, dated 15.5.2019 and for summoning of Opposite party nos. 2 , 3, 4, 5 and 6, in Complaint Case No. 1299 of 2017, Smt. Manisha vs. Vivek Kumar and others, under Sections 498-A, 406, 323, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Mahila Thana, Jhansi.

(2.) Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the complaint was filed against Vivek Kumar @ Santosh Kumar (Husband), Daya Ram Prajapati, Ashok Kumar Prajapati, Ganesh Prasad Prajapati, Smt. Poonam @ Pukkhan, and Smt. Rajni for offence punishable, under Sections 498-A, 406, 323, 504 and 506 IPC, read with Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, Jhansi, but the learned Magistrate passed the impugned order of summoning whereby only Opposite party no.1, husband of the complainant, has been summoned for offence, punishable, under Sections 498-A, 406, 323, 504 and 506 IPC, read with Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, leaving behind other accused persons whereas there was sufficient evidence on record, under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., against those accused persons, but they were not summoned. Criminal Revision, under Section 397 of Cr.P.C. was filed against the impugned summoning order wherein the order of Magistrate was confirmed and revision was dismissed. Hence, this proceeding, with above prayer.

(3.) Learned AGA, representing State of U.P., has vehemently opposed this Application, filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.