HARDAYAL SINGH AND ANOTHER vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER

Criminal misc. application (C-482) no.358 of 2018 Upkar Singh Vs. State of Uttarakhand & another and criminal misc. application (C-482) no.359

of 2018 Hardayal Singh & another Vs. State of Uttarakhand Vs. another have been filed by the applicants for quashing the chargesheet dated

28.04.2018 filed by the Investigating Officer, as well as summoning order dated 18.01.2018, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rudrapur,

Udham Singh Nagar, whereby the applicants have been summoned in Case Crime No.431 of 2018, “State Vs. Upkar Singh & others under

Sections 323, 498A, 504 and 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act alongwith entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 431 of 2018

pending in the court of Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar.Â

Brief facts of the case are that the marriage of the applicant Upkar Singh was solemnized with complainant/ respondent no.2 on 11.11.2012,

according to the Sikh rituals, and at the time of marriage, parents and relatives of the complainant gave gold and silver ornaments, household items,

fortuner car and electronic items etc. in the marriage and the entire gifts were handed over to the in-laws of the complainant/ respondent no.2. But

after sometime the husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law of the complainant / respondent no.2 demanded more money and committed cruelty with

the complainant/ respondent no.2 on the pretext that her father has not given sufficient dowry in the marriage.

3. It is contended that when the parents of the complainant could not fulfill the demand of dowry, then the husband asked the wife for divorce. It is

further contended that after sometime the applicant started living with one Sandeep Kaur and claims that he had married with the said lady. During the

course of the investigation, interim protection was granted to the applicants by this Court. Thereafter, the chargesheet was submitted. After

submission of the chargesheet, the Magistrate concerned took cognizance and issued summoning order dated 18.01.2018 against the applicants.

Aggrieved against the same, the aforementioned criminal misc. applications under Section 482 Cr.P.C have been filed by the applicants.

Considering the fact that the matter pertains to matrimonial dispute, this Court passed an interim order dated 07.03.2018 in both the C-482 petitions

stayed further proceedings of the Case Crime No.431 of 2018, State Vs. Upkar Singh & others under Sections 323, 498-A, 504 and 506 IPC and

Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar. When both

the cases were listed on 25.04.2018, the Court directed the parties to go for mediation. Attempt for mediation were made, but on 17.05.2018 when

the matter was listed, learned counsel for complainant/ Respondent no. 2 submitted that the applicant Upkar Singh has remarried and he has a child

out of the said wedlock. Said fact was denied by learned counsel for the applicant. To ascertain the facts as to whether the husband got remarried or

not, instructions were sought vide order dated 17.05.2018, from the police station concerned. Pursuant to the order issued by this Court dated

17.05.2018, the Standing Counsel submitted a report in the Court which suggests that the applicant Upkar Singh is living with some woman without

marriage.Â

Since the parties are not amenable for compromise and there are no chances of compromise, this fact has been admitted by the applicant that the

Fortuner car was given at the time of marriage but the applicant submits before this court that only Rs.10, 00,000/-(Rupees Ten lacs only) were given

as loan and he subsequently sold the car to the showroom. There is no question of denial of the charges made in the chargesheet and FIR, rather most

of the allegations, as alleged in the FIR and mentioned in the chargesheet have been admitted. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that earlier

there was a compromise between the parties and an amount of Rs.5, 00,000/- has been paid but the remaining amount still remain unpaid.

During the course of the dictation of the judgment applicant Upkar Singh, who is identified by Mr. Vikas Anand, Advocate, submitted that the

compromise took place earlier for an amount of Rs.25,00,000/- and out of Rs.25,00,000/-, Rs.5,00,000/- has been paid to the complainant/ respondent

no.2. He further submits that at present he is not having the entire amount of Rs.20, 00,000/- to be paid to the complainant. He further submits that he

will pay Rs.8, 00,000/- by 25.05.2018. He also submits that he is giving two postdated cheques of Rs. 6, 00,000/- each bearing no.025607 and 025605

of Nainital Bank Limited, Branch Bazpur to respondent no.2 payable within six months. The amount of the cheques shall be encashed by 20.11.2018

by the complainant/ respondent no.2.

In case, the amount of Rs. 8,00,000/- so promised to be paid to the respondent no.2 within three days subsequent amount of Rs. 12,00,000/-

to be paid by cheques bearing nos.025607 and 025605 of Nainital Bank Limited, Branch Bazpur, are paid by the applicant Upkar Singh to the

complainant/respondent no. 2 within the stipulated time. The proceedings of the Criminal Case No. 431 of 2018, State Vs. Upkar Singh & ors under

Sections 323, 498A, 504 and 506 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rudrapur, District

Udham Singh Nagar shall stand quashed in regard of all the three applicants. In case, the said conditions as mentioned above are not fulfilled by the

applicant Upkar Singh, the proceedings quashed by this order against the said applicant shall revive automatically and contempt proceeding shall be

drawn against the applicant Upkar Singh for non-compliance of the order passed by this Court today.