Court No. - 44
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 25252 of 2018 Applicant :- Shahnaz Bano And 7 Others Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Imran Mabood Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Ms. Sunita Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Mr.
I.M. Khan, learned counsel for the applicants, and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the summoning order dated 1st January, 2018 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IInd, Court No. 10, Basti in Complaint Case No. 492 of 2015 (Mohd. Ibrahim vs. Israil & Others), under Sections 406, 504 and 427 I.P.C., Police Station Parshurampur, District Basti as well as the entire proceedings of the above mentioned complaint case.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that marriage of applicant no.1 Shahnaz Bano was solemnized with son of opposite party no.2, namely, Maqsood on 16th October, 2014, in accordance with the Muslim Rites and Customs. From 26th February,2015, son of opposite party no.2 i.e. Maqsood abandoned applicant no.1 forcing her to reside with her parents. Faced with despair and destitution, applicant no.1 initiated criminal proceedings against her husband and his family members, details of which are mentioned in paragraph nos. 12 to 15 of the affidavit filed in support of the present application. On the aforesaid factual premise, learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present criminal proceedings have been initiated by the father-in-law of applicant no.1 as counter blast to the criminal proceedings initiated by applicant no.1. He, therefore, submits that the present criminal proceedings are not only malicious but also amount to an abuse of the process of the Court. It is further submitted that the present criminal proceedings have been initiated by opposite party no.2 to wreak vengeance which is not permissible in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of M/s Eicher Tractor Ltd. & others vs. Harihar Singh & Another reported in 2009 (1) JIC 245 (SC).
Having considered the facts and circumstances as brought on record and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicants and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and upon perusal of the record, matter requires consideration.
Issue notice to opposite party No.2, calling upon him to file counter affidavit.
List on the date fixed in the notice.
Until further orders of court, further proceedings of above mentioned complaint case, shall remain stayed.
(Rajeev Misra, J.) Order Date :- 27.7.2018 Sushil/-