Dismissed

Smt. Shashi Prabha and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC24 Jul 2019A482/14691/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed to quash a charge sheet, ruling it non-maintainable due to a prior final order. The court held the applicants were misusing court processes and concealed facts. It imposed a cost of Rs. 10,000 on the applicants.

What did the court decide?

The application is dismissed and Rs. 10,000 costs to be paid by the applicants to O.P. No.2 within three weeks.

Smt. Shashi Prabha and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 72

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 14691 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Shashi Prabha And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shyam Shankar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjay Kumar Yadav,Vidit Narayan Mishra

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Shyam Shankar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri V.N. Mishra, learned counsel for O.P. No.2 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

This application has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 29.12.2013 pending in the Court of the learned C.J.M., Ghaziabad in Case No.25540 of 2016 (State Vs. Vivek Tripathi & Ors.) arising out of Case Crime No.238 of 2013, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 498-A, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Ghaziabad.

¶7

This Court vide order dated 3.5.2018 referred to the matter to the mediation center for settlement and parties have failed to appear before the mediator, ultimately, mediation between the parties has failed.

¶8

It reflects from the record that earlier the Application U/S 482 No. 8020 of 2015 (Smt. Shashi Prabha Tripathi & 2Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.) was filed which finally decided by Hon'ble Vijay Prakash Pathak, J. vide order dated 1.4.2015 in terms of same day bail, but the said order has not been complied with accordingly non-bailable warrant was issued against the applicants. Again, Application U/S 482 No. 25985 of 2017 (Vivek Tripathi & 02 Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors) was filed for quashing the non-bailable warrant dated 28.7.2017, which was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 23.8.2017. The order passed on 23.8.2017 is quoted as under:-

¶9

"Supplementary affidavit filed in Court today is taken on record.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶11

The present application has been preferred for quashing the impugned non-bailable warrant order dated 28.7.2017 issued by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Ghaziabad in Case No. 407/20145 against the applicants arising out of case crime no. 238/2013, u/s 498A, 467, 468,

¶12

471, 419, 420 and 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act as well as under Section 82 and 83 Cr.P.C., P.S. Mahila Thana, District Ghaziabad by means of which non-bailable warrant has been issued and also 82 and 83 Cr.PC. have been issued simultaneously.

¶13

The Court has been informed that earlier an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was filed for quashing of entire proceeding and the charge sheet and thus the present application is not maintainable.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicant has filed supplementary affidavit challenging the charge sheet again with the contention that there is a new ground now, nevertheless, the fact remains that a fresh 482 application will not be maintainable for the same cause of action.

¶15

It is not being disputed that the charge sheet has earlier been challenged by filing Application u/s 482 No. 8020 of 2015 (Smt. Shashi Prabha Tripathi & 2 Ors.) which was disposed off finally on 1.4.2015 by Hon'ble Vijay Prakash Pathak, J. in terms of same day bail. It appears that even the non-bailable warrant has been issued time and again against the applicants and they have also challenged the same before this Court.

¶16

Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 has placed reliance upon the Application u/s 482 No. 34685 of 2015 which was disposed off finally on 7.12.2015. They again filed Application u/s 482 No. 33309 of 2016, which was disposed off finally on 13.1.2017 in terms of same day bail then thereafter a time extension was filed being Time Extension Application No. 118899 of 2017 in which time was extended. It seems that against the warrants, an application u/s 482 No. 7687 of 2017 was also filed in which time was granted.

¶17

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, no case for grant of any indulgence has been made out.

¶18

Accordingly, the application is rejected."

¶19

Again, the present application has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet, which is not all maintainable. In fact, the applicants are misusing the process of the Court and even by concealing the material facts and obtained the interim order for referring the matter to the mediation center.

¶20

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, no ground for grant of any indulgence has been made out.

¶21

Accordingly, the present application is dismissed subject to the cost of Rs. 10,000/- which shall be paid by the applicants to the O.P. No.2 within three weeks. In case, applicants fail to pay the aforesaid amount within the stipulated period, the Registrar General of the Court shall inform the District Magistrate concerned for the recovery of the said amount as arrears of land revenue from the applicants.

¶22

Order Date :- 24.7.2019/Akbar

Smt. Shashi Prabha and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Shashi Prabha and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vinit and 2 others Vs State of U.P. and 2 others

Pawan Kumar Jaiswal @ Pawan Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Aseem Kumar Rana and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Hriday Narayan Mishra and 6 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Haroon Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Madan Gopal and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.