Dismissed

Ravi Shankar Dohaliya and 2 Others v. State of U.P Thru Secretary Home Lknw. and Another

Allahabad HC27 Apr 2022A482/3235/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash a summoning order, charge sheet, and complaint proceedings, the court held that allegations disclosed a cognizable offence supported by investigation materials. The prayer to quash was rejected without assessing correctness, and the bail/arrest issue was disposed of by reference to Supreme Court guidelines.

What the court decided

AI extract

Ravi Shankar Dohaliya and 2 Others Vs State of… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3235 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ravi Shankar Dohaliya And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru Secretary Home Lknw. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Tarun Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This application has been filed for quashing of the summoning order dated 12.11.2021 passed by Civil Judge (J.D.)/FTC(Crime Against Women) Jalaun at Orai as well a entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 44 of 2020, Smt. Sonu @ Saumya Vs. Ravi Shankar Dohaliya & others, under section 498-A, 323, 504, IPC and section 4 D.P. Act, P.S. Mahila Thana Orai, District Jalaun.

¶7

On perusal of the record, the Court finds that the allegations made in the first information report disclose commission of a cognizable offence and those allegations have found support from the material collected during the course of investigation on the basis whereof the police has laid a charge sheet against the applicant.

¶8

At this Court, in exercise of its power under section 482 Cr.P.C., is not required to assess the correctness of the allegation and the reliability of the material collected during the course of investigation, the prayer to quash the charge sheet and the consequential proceeding is rejected.

¶9

At this stage, the learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have so far not been arrested in the above case and the police is seeking to arrest the applicants and there may be coercive processes issued against the applicants by the court concerned therefore, some direction may be issued to the court concerned for consideration of the bail prayer of the applicants.

¶10

As the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, decided on 07.10.2021) has already laid down guidelines for grant of bail, without fettering the discretion of the courts concerned and the statutory provisions governing consideration in grant of bail, no specific direction need be issued by this Court as it is expected that the court concerned will take into consideration the necessary guidelines already issued by the Apex court.

¶11

With the aforesaid observations, the application is disposed off.

¶12

Order Date :- 27.4.2022

¶13

RPD

¶14

Digitally signed by RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI Date: 2022.04.28 14:17:43 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ravi Shankar Dohaliya and 2 Others v. State of U.P Thru Secretary Home Lknw. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Ravi Shankar Dohaliya and 2 Others v. State of U.P Thru Secretary Home Lknw. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Motikhan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramesh Chandra Kesharwani Vs State of U.P.and Another

Yogendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Shakuntla Vs State of U.P.and 2 Others

Ashish Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pramod Kumar @ Ashok Kumar and 4 Others Vs State of U.P.and Another