Court No. - 1
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9601 of 2018 Applicant :- Rameshwar And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Gautam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Heard Sri Pradeep Bhardwaj holding brief of Sri Rajesh Kumar Gautam, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Ashish Pandey, learned AGA for the State.
Certified copy of the impugned judgment and order of trial court has been taken on record.
This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred with the prayer to set-aside the order 15.2.2018 in case no. 437 of 2018 (State Vs. Rameshwar and another) arising out of Session Trial No. 501 of 2015, under Section 498A, 323, 326, 307 IPC, P.S.
Vrindavan, District Mathura, in which the court below directed for initiating the proceeding under Section 193 IPC r/w 195 IPC against the applicants.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicant no. 1 is informant of the case and the applicant no. 2 is the real sister and was married to one Dharmendra and the F.I.R. which was lodged by the applicant no. 1 against in-laws of applicant no. 2 as Case Crime No. 997 of 2014, under Sections 498A, 323, 326, 307 IPC and 3/4 D.P.Act, P.S.
Vrindavan, District Mathura. They were put to trial in S.T. No.
501 of 2015. They have been acquitted by the impugned judgment by the trial court which has also initiated proceedings against the applicants under Section 193 IPC read with Section 195 Cr.P.C. and further a notice has been issued under Section 365 Cr.P.C. against them for their prosecution.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the impugned judgment by which the proceeding u/s 193 IPC read with Section 195 Cr.P.C. has been initiated against the applicants and submitted that present application before this Court for quashing of the said proceeding in pursuance of the impugned order is not maintainable as the applicant no. 2 who is informant of the case has remedy of filing an appeal against the acquittal under Section 372 Cr.P.C., if he is aggrieved by the said judgment.
After having considered the arguments raised by learned AGA, learned counsel for the applicants could not give a satisfactory reply with respect to the maintainability of the said application.
After having heard learned counsel for the parties, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and perusing the impugned judgment, it is apparent that the applicant no. 1 who is informant of the case and the applicant no. 2 who is victim wife of the accused named in the F.I.R., if are aggrieved by the order of acquittal or initiation of proceeding against them under Section 193 IPC read with 195 Cr.P.C., they are at liberty to avail the appropriate legal remedy available under law against the impugned judgment and present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. filed by them for the aforesaid prayer is not maintainable and the same is rejected on this ground alone.
Order Date :- 29.3.2018 A.K.Srivastava