Dismissed

Smt. Priyanka Bishnoi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC12 Jan 2023A482/3145/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused to quash the summoning order in a case involving bigamy and cheating allegations under Section 482 CrPC. It held that disputed questions of fact cannot be adjudicated at this stage and directed the trial court to consider a discharge application expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing the summoning order refused.

Smt. Priyanka Bishnoi and 2 Others Vs State of… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 65 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3145 of 2022 Applicant :- Smt. Priyanka Bishnoi And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Prakash Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jitendra Singh Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶2

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

¶3

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 14.12.2021 of complaint case No. 2360 of 2021, Gaurav Bishnoi Vs. Smt. Priyanka Bishnoi and others, under section 494, 406, 420 I.P.C. pending in the court of A.C.J.M, Bijnor.

¶4

As per the allegations made in complaint, it is alleged that the applicant no.1 has performed second marriage with O.P. No.2 during the subsistence of her first marriage. It is further alleged that on 15.6.2018, the applicant alongwith his brother reached at the house of O.P. No.2 and has taken away certain jewellery from his house.

¶5

Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that applicants were already released on bail.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that from perusal of the allegations made in the complaint and the material collected during the course of enquiry, no offence is disclosed against the applicants and the present case has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of harassment. He has pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention, as such, summoning order be quashed.

¶7

Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that from perusal of the allegations made in the complaint and the material collected during the course of enquiry, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicants and as such, summoning order cannot be quashed.

¶8

From 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. 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.

¶9

At this stage, only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble 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. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.

¶10

Moreover, the applicants had already been directed to be released on bail and he has got right of discharge under Sections 239, 245 or 227 Cr.P.C., as the case may be, through a proper application for the said purpose and he is free to take all submissions in the said discharge application before the trial court.

¶11

At this stage, this Court is not in a position to weigh the factual matrix of the case properly and accused has a right to file a discharge application before the trial court and the trial court may decide their discharge application, if there is no evidence against them.

¶12

The prayer for quashing the summoning order is therefore refused.

¶13

However, it is directed that in case the applicant files an application for discharge before the court below, the same be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law after hearing the public prosecutor.

¶14

With the aforesaid directions, this application under Section 482 CrPC is finally disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 12.1.2023

¶16

¶17

Digitally signed by :- RAM ASARE MORYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Priyanka Bishnoi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Priyanka Bishnoi and 2 Others 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

Smt. Omwati and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Virendra Kumar Sharma and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Sagar Ojha and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Atif and 2 Others Vs State of U.P and Another

Angad Chauhan and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rahul Yadav (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Another