The court rejected an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of criminal proceedings. Finding that the allegation of outraging modesty was specific and prima facie made out, held no indulgence was required.
The present application is rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 91
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28537 of 2021
Applicant :- Mukesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Naresh,Sakshi Patel Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A
Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
Heard Sri Shiv Naresh, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Sushma Soni, learned AGA for the Staterespondent.
By way of filing present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant prays for quashing the charge sheet dated 3.1.2020 as well as cognizance order dated 13.3.2020 alongwith summoning order dated 22.8.2021 passed by Civil Judge (J.D.) Sikandrarau, District Hathras in case No. 235 of 2020 arising out of case crime No. 308 of 2019, under Section 323, 504, 506, 354, 354Kha, 452 IPC, P.S. Sikandrarau, District Hathras, pending before Civil Judge (Junior Division) Sikandrarau, District Hathras.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the FIR of the present case was lodged by the opposite party No. 2 on the basis of false and fabricated facts with ulterior motive and the FIR of the present case, itself shows that the allegation made against the applicant are, prima facie, appears to be false. He further submitted that without any proper investigation, charge sheet was filed against the applicant and therefore, the impugned proceedings, cognizance order as well as charge sheet against the applicant, is bad in the eye of law.
Per contra, learned AGA submitted that there is a specific allegation against the applicant in the FIR that he alongwith co-accused entered into the house of the opposite party No. 2 and tried to outrage her modesty and after investigation, charge sheet has been filed against the applicant and therefore, there is no illegality in the charge sheet.
I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record of the case.
There is specific allegation against the applicant that he and the co-accused entered into the house of opposite party No. 2 and forcibly tried to outrage her modesty and
after investigation, involvement of the applicant was found correct and therefore, charge sheet was submitted against the applicant and the co-accused. Perusal of the FIR and the other evidence collected by the Investigating Officer during investigation shows that prima facie, offence under Sections 323, 504, 506, 354, 354Kha, 452 IPC, is made out against the applicant. Therefore, no indulgence, at this stage, is required.
Accordingly, the present application is devoid of merit and is, hereby, rejected .
Order Date :- 17.5.2022 Ankita
Digitally signed by ANKITA SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.05.18 12:26:31 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the charge sheet and cognizance order is maintainable.
7 provisions across 2 enactments
Mukesh
State of U.P.
Sameer Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
