Ajay Kumar @ Monu, and Others. Vs. State of U.P. and Others.

Ajay Kumar @ Monu, and Others. vs State of U.P. and Others.

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Jul 01, 2010

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/911125

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/911125
Court: Allahabad High Court
Judge: Imtiyaz Murtaza ; Naheed Ara Moonis, J.J.
Decided On: Jul 01, 2010
Case Number: CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11512 of 2010.
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Prayer: Petition filed seeking for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st and 2nd Respondents herein to Release the goods Viz., 91 Units of old and Used Digital Multifunction Print & Copying Machines with Standard Accessories, imported vide Bill of Entry No.787095, dated 21.02.2011, under Free as Second Hand Capital ...

Key legal issue: Criminal
Acts & sections: Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 - Sections 3 , 4 ; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 498-A, 323;

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ajay Kumar @ Monu, and Others.

Advocate Abhitab Kumar Tiwari, Adv.

Respondent

State of U.P. and Others.

Advocate Ajay Kumar Singh ; Vivek Kumar Singh, Advs.

Legal References

Acts: Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 - Sections 3 , 4 ; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 498-A, 323;

Excerpt

prayer: petition filed seeking for a writ of mandamus, directing the 1st and 2nd respondents herein to release the goods viz., 91 units of old and used digital multifunction print & copying machines with standard accessories, imported vide bill of entry no.787095, dated 21.02.2011, under free as second hand capital goods in terms of para 2.17 read with definitions under 9.12 of the foreign trade policy 2009-2014 without imposing any restriction in the absence of specific restriction in para 2.17 of foreign trade policy and in para 2.33 of hand book of procedures 2009-2014 and any notification by 3rd respondent......advocate.2. the argument substantially is that fraught relation emanating from matrimonial bickering escalated into launching of criminal proceeding vide f.i.r. which was registered at case crime no.204 of 2010, under sections 498-a, 323 i.p.c. and section 3/4 dowry prohibition act, p.s. saroorpur, district meerut.3. having considered the arguments advanced across the bar, we have a feeling that court owes a duty to the society to strain to the utmost to repair the frayed relations between the parties so that the wounded situation may be healed into a healthy rapprochement. the matter in hand also appears to be one of those cases in which reconciliation should be tried between the disputing parties.4. while referring the matter to mediation centre with the consent of the petitioners, it is directed that the petitioners shall deposit a sum of rs.10,000/- with the mediation centre by way of bank draft drawn in favour of mediation centre, high court, allahabad, out of which a sum of rs.7000/- shall be payable to victim, smt. monika, the respondent no.4 and the remaining amount shall be kept for being utilised by the mediation centre. the amount aforesaid, it is further directed, shall be paid over to the respondent no.4 on her appearing before the mediation centre on the date fixed. the amount aforesaid, it may be clarified, are meant to meet expenses to be incurred for attending mediation sessions at allahabad for the respondent no.4 and the person escorting her.5. the office upon deposit of the bank draft shall issue notice within one week to the respondent no.4, i.e the wife calling upon her to appear in the mediation centre at allahabad high court on a date to be indicated in the said notice stating therein that the bank draft deposited by the petitioners shall be delivered in the mediation centre on the date fixed. the said notice shall be served upon respondent no.4 through c.j.m concerned. it needs hardly be said that both the parties shall appear either on.....

Full Judgment

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Vivek Kumar Singh, learned counsel for complainant and also learned Additional Government Advocate.

2. The argument substantially is that fraught relation emanating from matrimonial bickering escalated into launching of criminal proceeding vide F.I.R. which was registered at Case Crime No.204 of 2010, under Sections 498-A, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Saroorpur, District Meerut.

3. Having considered the arguments advanced across the bar, we have a feeling that Court owes a duty to the society to strain to the utmost to repair the frayed relations between the parties so that the wounded situation may be healed into a healthy rapprochement. The matter in hand also appears to be one of those cases in which reconciliation should be tried between the disputing parties.

4. While referring the matter to Mediation Centre with the consent of the petitioners, it is directed that the petitioners shall deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/- with the Mediation Centre by way of Bank draft drawn in favour of Mediation Centre, High Court, Allahabad, out of which a sum of Rs.7000/- shall be payable to victim, Smt. Monika, the respondent no.4 and the remaining amount shall be kept for being utilised by the Mediation Centre. The amount aforesaid, it is further directed, shall be paid over to the respondent no.4 on her appearing before the Mediation Centre on the date fixed. The amount aforesaid, it may be clarified, are meant to meet expenses to be incurred for attending mediation sessions at Allahabad for the respondent no.4 and the person escorting her.

5. The office upon deposit of the Bank draft shall issue notice within one week to the respondent no.4, i.e the wife calling upon her to appear in the Mediation Centre at Allahabad High Court on a date to be indicated in the said notice stating therein that the Bank draft deposited by the petitioners shall be delivered in the Mediation Centre on the date fixed. The said notice shall be served upon respondent no.4 through C.J.M concerned. It needs hardly be said that both the parties shall appear either on the date fixed or on a future date as may be agreed before the Mediation Centre for reconciliation. The Centre shall submit a report within one month from the date of parties appearing before it for reconciliation. The case shall be listed in the first week of September, 2010 along with report of Mediation Centre. In the meanwhile, the arrest of the petitioners in the aforesaid case shall remain stayed.

6. It may be made clear that in case, there occurs default by the petitioners either in depositing the amount or in appearing before the Mediation Centre on the date or dates fixed, the interim order staying arrest shall cease to be operative and the Mediation Centre shall immediately communicate with the office which in turn shall list the case within a week before the Bench concerned for passing appropriate order in the matter. It may be clarified that the case will not be treated as tied up to this Bench shall be listed before the appropriate Bench. Copy of this order will not be issued unless steps are taken.

Same Court & Year Allahabad · 2010 Same Parties Ajay Kumar @ Monu, and Others. vs State of U.P. and Others. Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Imtiyaz Murtaza ; Naheed Ara Moonis, J.J. Acts & Sections Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 - Sections 3 , 4 ; Indian Penal C...

Criminal