Dismissed

Ameer Ahmad @ Bhura v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Feb 2018A482/2056/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of proceedings involving dowry and cruelty allegations, the High Court refused the prayer. It held that the application is barred because disputed questions of fact remain and the prima facie case suffices to sustain the prosecution.

What did the court decide?

The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the charge-sheet and judicial proceedings is dismissed.

Ameer Ahmad @ Bhura Vs State of U.P. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 42 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2056 of 2018 Applicant :- Ameer Ahmad @ Bhura Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mr Shujauddin Counsel for Opposite Party :- C.S.C.

¶2

Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

¶3

Heard Sri Shujauddin, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Asish Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶4

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings including charge-sheet No.52 of 2017, in Criminal Case No. 828 of 2017 (State of U.P. Vs. Ameer Ahmad alias Bhura), arising out of Case Crime No. 0050 of 2017, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Rampur.

¶5

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the marriage of applicant with opposite party no.2, was the second marriage, as her earlier husband has given her divorce. The applicant was having three children and his earlier wife has died. The present FIR has been lodged by the opposite party no.2 for his malicious prosecution. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

¶6

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the

¶7

law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283.

¶8

The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case based on the charge-sheet is refused.

¶9

The application lacks merit and is accordingly, dismissed.

¶10

Order Date :- 1.2.2018/VKG

Ameer Ahmad @ Bhura v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ameer Ahmad @ Bhura v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Udai Bhan Karwariya Vs State of U.P.

Niveesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Shri Bhagwan and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Sarfaraz Vs State of U.P.

Deshraj Vs State of U.P.

Mahaveer and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another