Disposed

Arti Kaushal and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC13 Oct 2023/7726/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought quashing of criminal proceedings. The court permitted the applicant to file a discharge application before the trial court within ten days and directed its disposal within 45 days before discharging the present application.

What did the court decide?

Applicants permitted to file a discharge application before the court below within ten days, to be decided within 45 days.

Arti Kaushal and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:67330

¶2

Court No. - 28

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7726 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Arti Kaushal And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shuaib Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,In Person

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Shuaib Khan, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Aniruddh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State, Sri Amit Kapoor in person for the opposite party no.2.

¶8

Instant application has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 7.2.2023, summoning order dated 25.5.2023 in connection of First Information Report No.457/2023, Case Crime No.59176 of 2023 under SEctions 109, 427 I.p.C., P.S. Vibhuti Khand, District Lucknow (State Versus Arti Kaushal and others) pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the opposite party no.2 lodged an F.I.R. on 4.9.2021 while narrating the concocted and baseless story. He added that the opposite party no.2 is in habit of lodging the F.I.R. He next added that the Investigating Officer without collecting the material substance, has filed the charge sheet and the trial court ignoring the same summoned the accused-applicants. Therefore, submission is that whole criminal proceedings against the applicants are sheer abuse of process of law and are liable to be quashed.

¶10

On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has vehemently opposed the contention aforesaid and submits that there is cogent piece of evidence so as to corroborate the story of the prosecution and there is C.C.T.V. footage which also supports the version of the prosecution, as such, the applicants are not entitled to any relief.

¶11

After the argument at length, learned counsel for the applicants submits that interest of justice would be sub-served, if this Court directs the court below to permit the applicants to appear before the court below and file an application of discharge. He further submits that the court below may be directed to decide

¶12

the discharge application within stipulated period of time, as may be fixed by this Court.

¶13

Learned AGA for the State has no objection to the aforesaid submission.

¶14

In view of aforesaid, the applicants are permitted to file an application for discharge before the court below within a period of ten days from today and if such an application is filed, the same shall be decided within a further period of 45 days, strictly in accordance with law.

¶15

With the aforesaid observation, the application is disposed off . Order Date :- 13.10.2023 Ram Murti

¶16

Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Arti Kaushal and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arti Kaushal and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Diwakar Kanaujia and Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Shirish Dhawan Vs the State of U.P and Anr.

Bijendra Kumar @ Bijendra Rai and Anr. Vs the State of U.P and Anr.

Ram Narayan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

Sandeep @ Sandeep Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Syed Hayat Ahmad and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Home Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another