Uttarakhand High Court
Unknown vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another on 5 June, 2025
Author: Pankaj Purohit
Bench: Pankaj Purohit
2025:UHC:4578
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Criminal Misc. Application U/s 482 No.2189 of 2022
05th June, 2025
Bharat Gupta ...........Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and another ..........Respondents
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. Vaibhav Kinger, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Sagar Kothari,
Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. S.S. Chauhan, D.A.G. with Mr. Vikas Uniyal, B.H. for the
State.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
By means of the present C482 application, the
applicant has prayed for setting aside the charge sheet
dated 06.06.2021 as well as cognizance order dated
26.03.2022, passed by learned Ist Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun in Criminal Case No.1940
of 2022, State Vs. Bharat Gupta, under Sections 498-A,
323, 504 and 506 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry
Prohibition Act, 1961, pending in the court of Ist
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun.
2. Facts of the case in a nutshell are that
applicant is husband of respondent no.2. They got
married on 03.11.2014, but after lapse of time acrimony
grew between them, due to temperamental differences, on
which respondent no.2 left the house of applicant and
started living in her parental house. Thereafter on
12.02.2021 respondent no.2 got an F.I.R. registered
against the applicant and his family members with the
allegations of cruelty on account of demand of dowry. On
the basis of said F.I.R. a case was registered under
1
2025:UHC:4578
Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 of IPC and Section 3/4 of
Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. As the offences were less
than seven years, therefore, the Investigating Officer did
not arrest the applicant and his family members and
issued notices under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C. to them.
Applicant and his family members appeared before the
Investigating Officer and after investigation, the
Investigating Officer did not find any case against the
family members of applicant, but submitted a charge
sheet dated 06.06.2021 against the applicant under the
aforesaid sections before learned Ist Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun. On the basis of said
charge sheet learned Ist Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Dehradun took cognizance against the
applicant on 26.03.2022 and a Criminal Case No.1940 of
2022, State Vs. Bharat Gupta was registered against
him. After receiving the summon, issued by learned
Magistrate, the applicant appeared before the trial court
and he was released on bail by the trial court. Feeling
aggrieved by the said order dated 26.03.2022 the
applicant is before this Court.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that
the Investigating Officer did not investigate the matter
properly and in a routine manner. Respondent no.2 filed
a false complaint against the applicant under the
provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic
Violence Act, 2005 for harassment of applicant and his
family members. The F.I.R. registered by respondent no.2
against the applicant is a concocted one and holds no
water.
4. Per contra, learned State counsel submits that
there is credible and cogent evidence available against
the applicant which shows his involvement in the alleged
2
2025:UHC:4578
offences. He further submitted that there is no illegality
in the order passed by learned Ist Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, who took cognizance of the charge
sheet submitted by the Investigating Officer and rightly
summoned the applicant. Hence no interference is
warranted in the matter.
5. Having considered the submission made by
learned counsel for the parties and having gone through
the records, this Court is convinced that there is no
illegality and impropriety in the judgment and order
passed by learned Magistrate whereby he took
cognizance of the charge sheet submitted by the
Investigating Officer and summoned the applicant.
Reason assigned by the court below is quite convincing
and need no interference by this Court.
6. Accordingly the present C482 application is
dismissed.
7. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of
accordingly.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
05.06.2025
SK
3