Dismissed

Kaushal Kishor v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC24 May 2022A482/12190/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashal of proceedings for offences under Sections 406 and 504 IPC. It held that a prima facie case existed based on the FIR alleging vehicle misappropriation and abuse, finding no illegality in the chargesheet.

What did the court decide?

The application to quash the N.B.W. dated 04.01.2022 and proceedings under Sections 406 and 504 IPC was dismissed.

Kaushal Kishor Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 91 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12190 of 2022 Applicant :- Kaushal Kishor Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Bahadur Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶3

Heard Sri Vijay Bahadur, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arvind Kumar, learned AGA for the State and perused the record of the case.

¶4

By way of present application, applicant made prayer to quash the N.B.W. dated 04.01.2022 and proceedings of Case No 3254 of 2020 (State Vs. Chandrapal and others) as well as chargesheet dated 26.03.2020 arising out of Case Crime N 558 of 2019, under Sections 406, 504 IPC, Police Station Civil Line, District Aligarh pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh.

¶5

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and from the perusal of the FIR and other material available on record, no offence under Section 406 and 504 IPC is made out against the applicant. He further submitted that applicant neither misappropriated the vehicle of opposite party no.2 nor he in any manner duped him, but in spite of that without any proper investigation, charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant.

¶6

Per contra, learned AGA submitted that there is specific allegation against the applicant in the FIR itself that he did not return the vehicle of opposite party no.2 and thus committed an offence under Section 406 IPC, therefore, there is no illegality in the charge-sheet filed against the applicant.

¶7

I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case. According to FIR, applicant taken away the vehicle of opposite party no.2, the informant and did not return the same and when opposite party no.2 demanded his vehicle back, then applicant abused him. From the perusal of the FIR and the statements of witnesses including opposite party no.2 recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., prima facie offence under Section 406, 504 IPC is made out against the applicant, therefore, I find no illegality in the impugned charge-sheet filed against the applicant.

¶8

Accordingly, the present application is hereby dismissed.

¶9

Order Date :- 24.5.2022 AK Pandey

¶10

Digitally signed by ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY Date: 2022.06.13 17:22:16 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kaushal Kishor v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kaushal Kishor 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

Sri Kant Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sheena Jindal Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others

Navi Hasan Vs State of U.P.and Another

Sobhi and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dharamveer Singh Gurjar Vs Alok Kumar Tyagi

Smt. Virma Devi Vs State of U.P.and Another