Dismissed

Nigar Yasmin v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC8 Jul 2021A482/11273/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the cognizance order and criminal proceedings. The Court held that the prosecution was legitimate, no abuse of process was seen, and the application was devoid of merit, dismissing it.

What did the court decide?

The application to quash the cognizance order and entire proceedings was dismissed. The applicant was directed to approach the trial court for bail.

Nigar Yasmin Vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11273 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Nigar Yasmin Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kundan Rai

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-respondent.

¶6

By means of this application u/s 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant has prayed for quashing the cognizance order dated 01.10.2020 as well as the entire proceedings of the Case No. 1304 of 2020 (State of U.P. Vs. Nigar Yasmin and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 452 of 2020, under Sections 406, 504, 506 and 120 B IPC, PS Chhibramau, District Kannauj pending in the Court of Addtional Chief Judicial Magistrate Chhibramau, District Kannauj.

¶7

The contention of the counsel for applicant is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He has pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contentions.

¶8

Learned counsel further submits that the present FIR is the counterblast of the FIR lodged by the present accused against the complainant side and the charge sheet submitted by the police on the basis of this FIR is illegal. He also submits that after the investigation the police has not found the facts as narrated in the FIR true completely and the police has absolved a person who was alleged to have carried the applicant in his WagonR car.

¶9

The learned AGA submits that the police has submitted the charge sheet after collecting the evidence against the present accused applicant and the police has properly investigated the matter and absolved the accused Munna from the offence and no charge sheet has been submitted against him who was alleged to have used his car in the incident.

¶10

After considering the rival submissions of the parties and also going through the documents annexed with the paper book, this Court is of the opinion that the police has submitted the charge sheet after collecting the evidence and the magistrate has taken cognizance after perusal of the charge sheet impugned in this application. No abuse of the process of law is seen in the order taking cognizance of the charge sheet.

¶11

The application is devoid of merit and is dismissed.

¶12

The applicant is free to approach the learned trial court with prayer for bail and in case bail application is present by the applicant that will be considered and decided expeditiously by the trial Court in view of the law laid down by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as by the Supreme Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P., reported in 2009 (4) SCC 437 , after hearing the Public Prosecutor.

¶13

Order Date :- 8.7.2021 LBY

¶14

Digitally signed by Justice Ajit Singh Date: 2021.07.16 16:50:40 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Nigar Yasmin v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nigar Yasmin 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sayka Bi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pavnendra Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohd. Arif Usmani Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd Imran and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Satendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Others

Pradeep Kumar Gupta Vs State of u.p and anther