Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

Allahabad High Court Sets Aside Summoning Order in Dowry Case: Cites Violation of Provisions of Section 210 Cr.P.C.

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Allahabad High Court on 11 Sep. 2023 set aside a summoning order against Mohammad Ayub Rizvi and Others in a dowry case filed by Smt. Salma Khan. The Bench headed by Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh questioned the approach of the lower court, highlighting that "the learned trial court ignoring the provisions of Section 210 Cr.P.C., proceeded in the matter and has summoned the present applicants under Sections 498A, 323 I.P.C. and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act."

The applicants had approached the High Court under Section 482, seeking to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.942/18 under Section 498-A, 323 I.P.C., and Section 4 D.P. Act, along with the summoning order dated 13.9.2018.

During the proceedings, the applicants' counsel argued that there had been no proper inquiry or investigation before proceeding against them. They also emphasized the violation of Section 210 Cr.P.C. by the trial court. The counsel added that the summoning order lacked reasoning and had been "passed in a cavalier manner."

The court, in its judgement, agreed with the applicants' contention, stating that "the procedure prescribed under Section 210 of Cr.P.C. is very specific" and was not followed by the trial court. The judgement also cited the Apex Court’s verdict in the case of Abhijit Pawar Vs. Hemant Madhukar Nimbalkar and another, underlining that the "requirement of conducting inquiry or directing investigation before issuing process is not an empty formality."

The court thus concluded that the trial court's approach was not in line with the legal mandates, setting aside the summoning order and sending the case back for reconsideration.

The decision has been met with mixed reactions, but it underscores the judiciary's commitment to ensuring that legal procedures are rigorously followed before taking punitive actions.

 Date of Decision: 11 September 2023

Mohammad Ayub Rizvi and Others vs Smt. Salma Khan and Another

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Mohammad_Ayub_Rizvi_And_Others_vs_Smt_Salma_Khan_And_Another_11_September_2023_ALLH.pdf"]

Latest Legal News