SUNIL KUMAR AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                 APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29542 of 2009

Sunil Kumar And Others
                                                              .....Applicant(s)
                                    Versus

State of U.P. and Others
                                                                 .....Opposite
                                                                       Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Dharam Pal Singh, S.Niranjan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Avanish Mishra, Govt. Advocate, P.K.
                                Rao, V.B.Rao

Court No. - 73
                      HON'BLE SANDEEP JAIN, J.

1. None is present for the accused-applicants.

2. Heard learned counsel for opposite party No. 3.

3. Learned counsel for opposite party No. 3 submits that the marriage of the
complainant, Smt. Reena, was solemnized with accused-applicant Sunil @
Bablu on 28.04.2005. Subsequently, a matrimonial dispute arose between
the parties, pursuant to which a complaint case was instituted by the
complainant under Section 498-A IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act. During the course of trial, a compromise was entered into
between the parties, pursuant to which the accused-applicants were acquitted
of the charges levelled against them.

4. Learned counsel has produced before the Court, for its perusal, a certified
copy of the judgment and order dated 22.01.2015 and submits that, in view
of the acquittal of the accused-applicants, the present application under
Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been rendered infructuous.

5. I have heard learned counsel for opposite party No. 3 and perused the
record.

6. From the perusal of the record, it is apparent that the present application
under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking the following reliefs:

“(i) quash the order dated 02.08.2008 (Annexure-5) passed by the Chief Judicial
                                                                                                 A482 No. 29542 of 2009
                                                                        2


                                    Magistrate, Jalaun at Orai in Complaint Case No. 220 of 2008, summoning the
                                    applicants to face trial under Section 498-A IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry
                                    Prohibition Act, Police Station Kotwali, Orai, District Jalaun, and all subsequent
                                    proceedings in pursuance thereof;

                                    (ii) stay further proceedings of Complaint Case No. 220 of 2008, Manoj Vs. Sunil and
                                    others, under Section 498-A IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act,
                                    Police Station Kotwali, Orai, District Jalaun, pending in the Court of the Chief
                                    Judicial Magistrate, Jalaun at Orai.”

                                    7. It further appears from the record that a matrimonial dispute arose
                                    between the complainant, Smt. Reena, and her husband, Sunil @ Bablu,
                                    pursuant to which proceedings under Section 498-A IPC and Sections 3/4 of
                                    the Dowry Prohibition Act were initiated. The said proceedings culminated
                                    in a trial before the Judicial Magistrate, Jalaun at Orai.

                                    8. During the course of the trial, a compromise was entered into between the
                                    parties. In view of the said compromise, the accused-applicants, namely,
                                    Sunil Kumar, Smt. Phoola Rani and Ramcharan, were acquitted of the
                                    charges under Section 498-A IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition
                                    Act by judgment and order dated 22.01.2015 passed by the Judicial
                                    Magistrate, Jalaun at Orai.

                                    9. In view of the aforesaid acquittal of the accused-applicants, no
                                    proceedings pursuant to the impugned summoning order dated 02.08.2008
                                    survive for consideration in the present application. Consequently, the reliefs
                                    sought in the present application have become infructuous.

                                    10. Accordingly, the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is
                                    dismissed as having become infructuous.



                                                                                                   (Sandeep Jain,J.)
                                    September 23, 2026
                                    Mayank




Digitally signed by :-
MAYANK KUMAR SHARMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad