Dismissed

Sapna Chaubey @ Sapna Mishra v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC9 Dec 2022A482/12594/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant sought quashing of the charge sheet and impugned proceedings alleging malafide intent. The Court held that disputed questions of fact could not be adjudicated at this stage and that a prima facie case existed. The application was dismissed for lack of merit.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash the charge sheet, cognizance order, and entire prosecution proceedings was refused.

Sapna Chaubey @ Sapna Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 87

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12594 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Sapna Chaubey @ Sapna Mishra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Shailesh Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 11.06.2017, cognizance order dated 31.08.2017as well as the entire proceedings of Case No. 834 of 2017 (State Vs. Shravan Kumar Chaubey and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 289 of 2017, under Sections- 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 352, 452 I.P.C., Police Station- Chaubeypur, District- Varanasi, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate-III, Varanasi.

¶7

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

¶8

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 at this stage. All the submissions made at the bar, relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 . The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.

¶9

The reliefs as sought by the applicant is refused.

¶10

Interim order, if any, stands discharged.

¶11

The application lacks merit and is accordingly, dismissed.

¶12

Office is directed to communicate the order passed by this Court to the concerned Court below.

¶13

Order Date :- 9.12.2022 S.Ali

¶14

Digitally signed by SHAUKAT ALI Date: 2022.12.12 17:30:45 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sapna Chaubey @ Sapna Mishra v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sapna Chaubey @ Sapna Mishra v. State of U.P. and Anr.

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

Brijendra Singh Vs State of U.P and Another

Mani Lal and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Saurabh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Radhika Devi and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd. and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another