Allowed

Seema Varshney and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC26 Oct 2021A482/7559/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Section 482 CrPC application, the court quashed the stage-wise proceedings initiated by the State following the Supreme Court's acquittal. Recognizing the acquittal as a constitutional right extinguishing the right to prosecute, the application to quash the stage-wise proceedings was allowed.

What did the court decide?

The application to quash the stage-wise proceedings (ISR 239/20) and the present proceedings under Section 482 CrPC No. 7559 of 2021 were allowed; the proceedings were quashed.

Seema Varshney and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 85

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7559 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Seema Varshney And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Paritosh Sukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajay Kumar Shukla

¶4

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

vkosndx.k ds fo}ku vf/koDrk] foi{kh la0 2 ds fo}ku vf/koDrk ,oa fo}ku vij 'kkldh; vf/koDrk mifLFkr gSaA

¶6

vkosndx.k }kjk /kkjk 482 na0iz0la0 ds vUrxZr ;g vkosnu i=] eq0v0la0 476 lu 2019] vUrxZr /kkjk 323] 504] 506 Hkk0na0fo0] Fkkuk flfoy ykbUl] ftyk vyhx<+ esa izsf"kr vkjksi i= la0 325 lu 2019 ls mn~Hkwr okn la0 239 lu 2020] tks eq[; U;kf;d eftLVzsV] vyhx<+ ds U;k;ky; esa yfEcr gS rFkk blesa ikfjr izlaKku vkns’k fn0 17&1&2020 ds fo:) nk;j fd;k x;k gSA

¶7

foi{kh la0 2 ds fo}ku vf/koDrk }kjk i{kdkjksa ds e/; gq, le>kSrkukek ,oa ml ij lacaf/kr U;k;ky; }kjk fd, x, lR;kiu dks U;k;ky; esa nkf[ky fd;k] mls i=koyh ij j[kk tk;A

¶8

vkosndx.k ds fo}ku vf/koDrk dk dFku gS fd ;g ikfjokfjd ekeyk gS rFkk bl izdj.k esa i{kdkjksa ds e/; vkil esa lqyg&le>kSrk gks x;k gS] bl izdkj i{kdkj vc okn dh dk;Zokgh dks vkxs ugha pykuk pkgrs gSaA

¶9

foi{kh la0 2 ds fo}ku vf/koDrk us vkosndx.k ds fo}ku vf/koDrk ds bu rdksZ dk iw.kZ :is.k leFkZu fd;k fd i{kdkjksa ds e/; vkil esa lqyg le>kSrk gks x;k gS rFkk vc os okn dh dk;Zokgh dks vkxs ugha pykuk pkgrs gSaA

¶10

mHk; i{k ds fo}ku vf/koDrkx.k }kjk mijksDr lqygukes dks Lohdkj djrs gq, ;g dFku fd;k x;k fd mDr le>kSrs ds n`f"Vxr foi{kh la0 2 dks mijksDr of.kZr okn dh laiw.kZ dk;Zokgh dks vikLr djus esa dksbZ vkifRr ugha gSA

¶11

fo}ku vij 'kkldh; vf/koDrk }kjk Hkh mijksDr rF; dks Lohdkj fd;k x;k gSA

¶12

ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us vius fu.kZ;ksa Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab, 2012 AIR SCW 5333, B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana, (2003) 3 SCC 675 and Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab, Laws (SC) 2014-3-56 esa ;g vo/kkfjr fd;k gS fd tgkW ij i{kdkjksa ds e/; vkil esa le>kSrk gks x;k gks] ogkW U;k;ky; esa fufgr 'kfDr;kW U;kf;d dk;Z dks xfr iznku djus ds fy, rFkk QkStnkjh dk;Zokgh dks lekIr djus ds fy, iz;ksx dh tk ldrh gSaA

¶13

mijksDr rF;ksa rFkk bl rF; ds nf"Vxr fd i{kdkj vc bl izdj.k dks vkxs ugha pykuk pkgrs gSa] ekeyk O;fDrxr izdfr dk gS] ftldk fucVkjk i{kdkj vkil esa lqyg le>kSrs ds vk/kkj ij dj pqds gSa] blfy, vc bl izdj.k dks vkxs pykus dk dksbZ vkSfpR; izrhr ugha gksrk gSA

¶14

mijksDr dkj.kksa ls /kkjk 482 na0iz0la0 ds rgr izLrqr ;g izkFkZuk i= Lohdkj fd;k tkrk gS rFkk vkosndx.k ds fo:) yfEcr mijksDr okn dh laiw.kZ dk;Zokgh vikLr dh tkrh gSA

¶15

fn0% 26&10&2021

¶16

ds0lh0flag

¶17

2 of 2

Seema Varshney and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Seema Varshney and 3 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nazreen Khatoon Vs State of U.P. and Another

Tarun Verma Nad 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shankar Lal and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ajay @ Gullu Baljor and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pradeep Singh and 11 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Omkarnath Singh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another