IMPORTANT POINT
Summoning of witness – Conduct of petitioner in preferring successive applications under Section 311 of Code and seeking adjournments cannot be countenanced.

JUDGMENT :

AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH. J.

1. The present petition arises from the Final Order and Judgment dated 03.07.2024 in Application under Section 482 No. 5718 of 2024 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Impugned Order') [2024:AHC-LKO:45305] passed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Bench at Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as the 'High Court') whereby the petitioner's plea, seeking quashing of Orders dated 18.05.2024 and 06.06.2024 passed by the Court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 20, Sultanpur, Uttar Pradesh (hereinafter referred to as the 'Trial Court') in Criminal Case No. 7940/2024 [State vs. Ashutosh Pathak and Others], was dismissed and the two Orders impugned therein were upheld.

FACTUAL OVERVIEW:

2. The marriage between the petitioner and respondent no. 2 took place on 16.02.2014. There are two issues from the wedlock. On 30.04.2018, First Information Report No. 19/2018 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘FIR’) was lodged at P.S. Mahila Thana Gauriganj, Amethi under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IPC’) alongwith Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘DP’ Act) by respondent no. 2- informant against the petitioner, his brother, and his parents. It was alleged that after marriage, from the beginning, the accused persons started harassing respondent no. 2 for dowry and demanded Rs. 10 Lakhs and 5 Biswa Land in Ambedkar Nagar. The petitioner had left the informant and both were living separately since a long time. It is the case of the informant, that the petitioner’s friend, Vinay Kumar Pathak, called her on 23.04.2018 saying that the petitioner is very upset and that she should return. Accordingly, the informant along with her mother and children went to the petitioner’s house on 26.04.2018. The events that took place on 28.04.2018 form the gravamen of the allegations. It is alleged that on that fateful day, the petitioner came back from college and started abusing and hitting the informant. Then, he dragged the informant along with her mother and children and locked them in the kitchen. Petitioner’s father is said to have stated that they will burn them to death. Vinay Kumar Pathak is said to have got the lock opened after which the police arrived and rescued the informant and others and took them out of the house safely. It is in this background that the instant FIR came to be registered.

3. After conclusion of the investigation, Chargesheet No. 32/2018 was filed on 10.10.2018 against the accused persons. Thereafter, Supplementary Chargesheet No. 32A/2018 was filed on 04.11.2018 against the accused persons for commission of offences under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 of the IPC along with Sections 3 and 4 of the DP Act. The Chargesheet listed a total of 16 witnesses, which included Vinay Kumar Pathak (petitioner’s friend) and Kanak Lata Singh (petitioner’s neighbour and sister-in-law). Cognizance on the Chargesheet was taken on 22.11.2018 and the accused were summoned. The Trial Court framed charges which were read over to the accused and upon denial of guilt by them, trial commenced.

4. On 19.09.2023, the petitioner filed an application under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Code’) for summoning two persons, viz. Vinay Kumar Pathak and Kanak Lata Singh. The Trial Court vide Order dated 18.05.2024 partly allowed the application and issued summons to the witness-Vinay Kumar Pathak and directed him to be present on 30.05.2024. The order/proceedings of 30.05.2024, if any, have not been brought to our notice. Thereafter, on 05.06.2024, though the witness was present, an application was moved by the counsel for petitioner on the ground of illness, which was accepted by the Trial Court with cost of Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand) imposed and the matter was posted for the next day as last opportunity