Dismissed

Sandeep Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC12 Jul 2022A482/9491/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single-judge High Court rejected an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a charge sheet and N.B.W. order, finding disclosure of a cognizable offence. It disposed of the bail-related prayer by referring to Apex Court guidelines, without issuing specific directions.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash charge sheet and summons rejected; bail prayer left for lower court per Apex Court guidelines.

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

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9491 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This application has been filed for quashing of the charge sheet 5.1.2020 as well as summoning order / N.B.W. order dated 30.11.2021 issued by Civil Judge (J.D.)/ FTC-1 (Offence against Women), Ghaziabad in Case No. 11676 of 2020 (State VS. Sandeep and others) arsing out of Case Crime no. 0086 of 2019, under sections 498-A, 307, 323, 504, 406 IPC and section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Ghaziabad.

¶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 applicant submits that the applicant has so far not been arrested in the above case and the police is seeking to arrest the applicant and there may be coercive processes issued against the applicant by the court concerned therefore, some direction may be issued to the court concerned for consideration of the bail prayer of the applicant.

¶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 :- 12.7.2022

¶13

RPD

¶14

Digitally signed by RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI Date: 2022.07.13 10:09:51 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sandeep Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Kumar 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

Altamish @ Altasim Vs State of Up and Another

Sanjeev Nagar Vs State of U.P and Another

Sunita Jha and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shahrukh Vs State of U.P Thru Secretary Home Lknw. and Another

Bhola Nath Shukla Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Ashish Varma and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another