Disposed

Subhash and 3 Others v. State of U.P and Another

Allahabad HC20 May 2022A482/11328/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court rejected the applicants' prayer to quash criminal proceedings but directed them to surrender within four weeks and ensured expedient disposal of bail under Satender Kumar Antil guidelines before disposing the application.

What did the court decide?

Direction to applicants to surrender within four weeks and for bail applications to be disposed of expeditiously; Application disposed of.

Subhash and 3 Others Vs State of U.P and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 42

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11328 of 2022

¶3

Applicant : - Subhash And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mahipal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party : - G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P./opposite party no.1 and perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants to quash the summoning order dated 12.07.2019 as well as proceeding of Case No.3873 of 2021 (old Complaint Case No.41 of 2019) (Ranvir Singh vs. Subhash and others), under Sections 384, 504 & 506 I.P.C., P.S.Kavi Nagar, District Ghaziabad.

¶7

Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant no.3 is daughter-in-law and applicant nos.1, 2, 4 are father, mother and brother of applicant no.3. Opposite party no.2 is father-in-law of applicant no.3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that present complaint is counterblast of the case lodged by the applicant no.3 against the opposite party no.2, husband and inlaws. Applicant no.3 has filed petition under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act in which defendant-husband Ravi has filed written statement and son of opposite party no.2 has filed divorce petition against the applicant no.3. Both the petitions are under Sections 9 and 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, are pending before court below. The complaint lodged by opposite party no.2 is only abuse of the process of Court, as such, it should be set aside.

¶8

A perusal of the statement under sections 200 & 202 Cr.P.C. and complaint, it is evident that cognizable offence is made out against the applicants. The argument raised by learned counsel for the applicants is disputed question of facts and Hon'ble Apex Court in various judgments has held that Court should avoid interference if question involved regarding disputed question of facts.

¶9

However, considering the aforesaid alternative prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants, it is directed that the applicants shall surrender before the concerned court below within four weeks from today and in case apply for bail, the bail application of the applicants shall be disposed of expeditiously

¶10

by the courts below in accordance with law and keeping in view the guidelines as laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2021 SCC Online SC 922.

¶11

With the above observations and directions, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of .

¶12

Order Date :- 20.5.2022 SKD

¶13

Digitally signed by SURJIT KUMAR DEY Date: 2022.05.20 18:17:04 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Subhash and 3 Others v. State of U.P and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhash 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jitendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shahid and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dhirendra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Priyodeep Halder Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sandeep Singh Faujdar and Another Vs State of U.P.and Another

Ram Kishor and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another