Dismissed

Suraj Sharma and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC12 Nov 2021A482/18095/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of proceedings for dowry harassment and cruelty, the court held that disputed facts cannot be examined at this stage. No prima facie case showed an offence was not made out. The application was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash the chargesheet dated 14.12.2020 and entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 260 of 2021 was refused.

Suraj Sharma and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18095 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Suraj Sharma And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dheeraj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the chargesheet dated 14.12.2020 and entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 260 of 2021, arising out of Case Crime No. 484 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506, 354 IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Karchhana, District Allahabad, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate-Ist, Allahabad.

¶7

As per the allegations made in the FIR, it is alleged that the opposite party no.2 was married to applicant no.1 on 12.03.2018, however, after the said marriage, the applicants started making demand of additional dowry from the opposite party no.2 and for non-fulfillment of demand of additional dowry, they used to torture her, maltreat her and subjected her to cruelty and she was also turned out of her matrimonial home.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the FIR and the material collected during the course of investigation, no offence is disclosed against the applicants and the present case has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of harassment. He has pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention, as such, entire proceedings be quashed.

¶9

Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the FIR and the material collected during the course of investigation, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicants and as such, impugned charge-sheet as well as entire proceedings cannot be quashed.

¶10

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. Moreover, all the submissions made at the bar relates to

¶11

the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 CrPC. At this stage, only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.

¶12

The prayer for quashing the impugned charge-sheet as well as entire proceedings is therefore refused.

¶13

However, it is directed that if the applicants appear before the court below and apply for bail, their prayer for bail be considered and decided as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law.

¶14

With the aforesaid observations, this application under Section 482 CrPC is finally disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 12.11.2021 Nadim

Suraj Sharma and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj Sharma 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yogendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arman Ali and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raj Kumar Prince and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Swami Sharan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Rajesh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ravi Shivharey Vs State of U.P. and Another