9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 1254X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Adv. Mr. Aditya Raj Pandey, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. Yashaswi Sk Chocksey, Adv. Mr. Ankit Singh, Adv. Mr. Yashish Chandra, Adv. Mr. Vijay Rajput, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Madhup Kumar Tiwari, Adv. Ms. Kavita Chaturwedi, Adv. Ms. Neha Rai, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar, AOR JUDGMENT Rajesh Bindal, J. Leave granted. 2. The complainant is before this Court challenging the order dated 25.04.2023 Passed in Misc. Criminal Case No.11184 of 2021 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Gwalior vide which the order dated 11.01.2021 passed by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Shivpuri In Criminal Revision No. 155 of 2019 quashing the summoning order dated 12.03.2019 Complaint Case bearing Case No.7798 of 2019 passed by the Trial C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... persons/respondent nos. 1 to 3 by filing Revision Petition Criminal Revision No. 155 of 2019 before the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Shivpuri which was partly allowed by the Sessions Court. The impugned order dated 12.03.2019 passed by the Magistrate was set aside to the extent of taking cognizance of the offence punishable under section 420 of IPC against the respondent no.1 and for the offence punishable under section 420 read with section 120-B of IPC against the respondent nos.2 and 3. 6. The appellant challenged the order of Sessions Court before the High Court. The same was upheld. It is against the aforesaid two orders, the appellant is before this Court. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that both the parties namel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ck, he was left with no option but to file complaint with the police on 08.07.2018. However, no action was taken on the complaint. Thereafter, the appellant preferred criminal complaint before the Magistrate on 20.07.2018. 7.3 Immediately after coming to know about the filing of the criminal complaint by the appellant, the respondent no.1 approached the Family Court, Panvel on 25.07.2018 where the Divorce Petition filed by her first husband under Sections 13(1)(i) and 13(1) (i-a) of the 1955 Act was pending for more than 6 months. The respondent no.1 filed an application seeking conversion thereof to a divorce by mutual consent under Section 13-B of the 1955 Act. After accepting the application the divorce was granted on the same day. 7.4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 420 read with Section 120-B, IPC for the reason that all of them had conspired with each other to dishonestly induce the appellant into marrying respondent no.1 and parting away with huge amount. 8. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that even on the basis of the pleaded facts and the material produced by the appellant before the Magistrate, no offence under Section 420, IPC can be made out. It cannot be said to be a case of criminal conspiracy and no offence of cheating is made out against the respondents. There is no error in the orders passed by the Sessions Court or the High Court. There was no concealment or cheating at the behest of the respondents as they had clearly disclosed all the facts to the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respondent no.1 rushed to the clinic of a lady doctor in Shivpuri (Madhya Pradesh), where couple resided after their marriage. The doctor disclosed that the respondent no.1 was pregnant. The joy of the appellant knew no bounds whereas the respondent no.1 was very sad. The message was even conveyed to the family members of the appellant as well as the respondent no.1. The respondent nos.2 and 3 were not happy. The appellant was surprised with the reaction. Later, when the reason was asked by the appellant from respondent no.1, he was told that she is yet to get divorce from her previous husband. It was a shock of life for the appellant. It was nothing else but cheating by showing a fake decree of divorce. It was for this reason only that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o be recorded. It was a preliminary stage of summoning. For summoning of an accused, prima facie case is to be made out on the basis of allegations in the complaint and the pre-summoning evidence led by the complainant. 13. In a challenge by the appellant to the aforesaid order in the quashing petition, the High Court dismissed the petition without recording any reasons. 14. Considering the material on record, in our opinion the approach of the Learned Sessions Court and the High Court in setting aside the summoning order against the accused persons i.e. respondent nos.1,2 and 3 under Section 420 read with Section 120-B IPC is not legally sustainable. 15. For the reasons mentioned above from the facts as pleaded in complaint and the evid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
