1 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application U/s 482 No. 543 of 2024 03rd March, 2025 Vipin Kumar & others …….Applicants Versus State of Uttarakhand and another ……...Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Narendra Bali, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. B.C. Joshi, A.G.A with Ms. Shweta Badola Dobhal, B.H. for the State. Mr. Vaibhav Singh, Advocate for respondent no.2/complainant. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. By means of the present C482 application, the applicants have challenged the summoning order dated 06.01.2024, passed by learned Ist Additional Civil Judge/Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar in Complaint Case No.1321 of 2023, Smt. Preeti Vs. Vipin Kumar & others, punishable under Sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC, registered at Police Station – Haridwar, District – Haridwar and a further prayer has been made to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.1321 of 2023, pending before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar. 2. Facts in a nutshell are that an application under Section 156(3) of CrPC was moved by respondent no.2 before the trial court stating therein allegations of harassment at the hands of the applicants. It was stated therein that sufficient amount of dowry had been given by father of respondent no.2 in the marriage, however the applicants, who are the in-laws of respondent no.2, were not satisfied with the dowry given in the marriage and they continued to harass her on one pretext or the other. Even she was subject to physical cruelty at the hands of the applicants. 3. On the said application, the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar registered the case as a complaint case and directed the same to be registered and the matter was directed to be fixed for evidence under Section 200 CrPC. By order dated 2 06.01.2024, the trial court has summoned the applicants to face the trial for the offences under the Sections 323, 504 of 506 of IPC. Challenging the summoning order the applicants have knocked the door of this Court. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the material available on record. 5. The crux of the complaint, launched by respondent no.2, is that respondent no.2 was subjected to physical and mental harassment at the hands of the applicants, for bringing lesser dowry in marriage. Even she was beaten up severely by the applicants on the pretext of aforesaid complaint. 6. The efforts for reconciliation between parties were also carried out, but all went in vain. 7. The fact as to whether allegations made in the complaint made by respondent no.2 are correct or not and can only be examined in the trial court. 8. On, prima facie, examination of the allegations, this Court is of the view that the offence alleged against the applicants are made out and it is duty of the trial court to reach to the conclusion only after evidence is adduced before it. 9. This task cannot be undertaken by this Court, at this stage. 10. In such view of the matter, I do not find any illegality and irregularity in the summoning order passed by trial court. 11. Accordingly writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. 12. Trial court is directed to proceed with the trial, in accordance with law. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 03.03.2025 SK