Dismissed

Yogendra Singh and Another v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC8 Jul 2022A482/4983/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant sought to quash criminal proceedings instituted against him under IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act allegations of harassment. The Court held that adjudicating factual disputes and evidence appraisal is beyond its jurisdiction at this stage. The existence of a prima facie case could not be negated, and the prayer for quashing was refused. Th

What did the court decide?

Application to quash criminal proceedings and charge sheet dismissed. Prayer for quashing entire proceedings refused.

Yogendra Singh and Another Vs State of U.P.and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 83 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4983 of 2022 Applicant :- Yogendra Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Bahadur Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶3

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 122 of 2021 (State Vs. Yogendra and another) arising out of Case Crime No.112 of 2019 under Sections 498-A, 323, 354 (Ka), 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Bhoginipur, District Ramabai Nagar (Kanpur Dehat) pending before learned Judicial Magistrate, Bhoginipur, District Ramabadi Nagar (Kanpur Dehat) as well as to quash the charge sheet dated 17.01.2020 and also to quash the cognizance order dated 15.02.2021.

¶4

The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants 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.

¶5

At this stage, the argument raised by learned counsel for the applicants involves adjudication of a factual dispute and appraisal of evidence.

¶6

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 applicants 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 .

¶7

The prayer for quashing the entire proceeding of the aforesaid case is refused.

¶8

The instant application lacks merit and is dismissed.

¶9

Order Date :- 8.7.2022/S.Ali

¶10

Digitally signed by SHAUKAT ALI Date: 2022.07.13 10:36:57 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Yogendra Singh and Another v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yogendra Singh and Another 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

Harihar Prasad Pathak Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Maya Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sunil Kumar and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shairun Nisha and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.and Another

Kaptan Singh and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Uday Raj Yadav and 6 Others Vs State of U.P.and Another