IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL C-482 No. 482 of 2005 Kanhaiya Lal Bhatia and others ………..Applicants Versus Special Judicial Magistrate Ist Dehradun and another ..…...Respondents Present: Mr. Arvind Vashist, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. Ramji Srivastava, Advocate for respondent no.2. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J(Oral) Heard Mr. Arvind Vashist, Advocate for the applicants and Mr. Ramji Srivastava, Advocate for respondent no.2. This Criminal Misc. application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants challenging the summoning order dated 1.4.2005 passed by Special Judicial Magistrate-I, Dehradun, in Criminal Case No. 1721of 2004 Smt. Meenu Bhatia Vs. Sri Kanhaia Lal and others whereby the court below has taken cognizance of a complaint made by the complainant/respondent no.2 under Section 406 IPC. The brief facts of the case are that respondent no.2 who is the wife of applicant no.1 has alleged demand of dowry etc. against the husband (applicant no.1) and also against the mother in law (applicant no. 2), two brothers in law (applicant nos. 3 and 4) and sister in law (applicant no.5). Learned counsel for the applicants contends that as per the averments made in the FIR no case is made out against applicant nos. 2 to 5 under Section 406 IPC inasmuch as applicant no.5 does not stay in the matrimonial home of the complainant, as she stays at Kotdwar in the district Pauri. There is also no specific allegation that any “Stridhan” or the articles etc. mentioned in the complaint which were alleged to be given to the wife at the time of marriage ceremony are with applicant nos. 2 to 5. Therefore, on the basis of the averments made in the FIR no case is made out against them. This Court, therefore, deems it fit and proper that for present the proceeding initiated against applicant nos. 2 to 5 shall not proceed. Summoning order dated 1.4.2005 is quashed and the proceedings against applicants nos. 2 to 5 are set aside. However, court shall proceed against the applicant no.1 i.e. the husband of respondent no.2. It is also clarified that during the trial when statements are recorded, or at any other stage the court feels justified to include any of the present applicants or any other persons as an accused, that may be done in accordance with law. With these observations, the present C-482 application is partly allowed. No order as to costs. Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to court concerned for necessary compliance. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J) 14.09.2010 Kuldeep