Dismissed

Shailu Pandit and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC24 Jan 2023A482/38377/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused to quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C., finding that a prima facie offence was disclosed. The court dismissed the application but directed that bail be considered if the applicants approach the lower court within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing of criminal proceedings refused; bail to be considered if applicants apply in lower court within three weeks.

Shailu Pandit and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 65

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 38377 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shailu Pandit And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 18.6.2022 as well as further proceedings of Complaint Case No. 56 of 2022 (Aasif Beg vs. Shailu Pandit and others), under Section 323, 392, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Shahganj, District- Agra, pending in the court of Addl. Sessions Judge/Special Judge (Dacoity Affected Area), Court No. 3, Agra.

¶7

As per the allegation made in the complaint, it is alleged that on 24.2.2022 at about 9:45 p.m., while the opposite party No. 2 was returning back to his house, he was intercepted by the applicants by putting him under fear of death, the applicants assaulted him and threatened him for withdrawing the criminal case.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the complaint and the material collected during the course of inquiry, no offence is disclosed against the applicants and the present case has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of harassment, as such, the entire criminal proceedings be quashed.

¶9

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

¶10

Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and from the perusal of the allegations made in the complaint and the statement of the witnesses and material collected during the course of inquiry prima facie, offence is clearly disclosed against the applicants.

¶11

At this stage, disputed question of fact cannot be considered, therefore, in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283, the prayer for quashing the entire criminal proceedings is refused.

¶12

However, in case the applicants appear before the court below within three weeks from today and apply for bail, their bail application be considered and disposed of in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in (2021) 10 SCC 773 after hearing the parties.

¶13

With the aforesaid observations, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 24.1.2023 KU

¶15

Digitally signed by :- KALIM UDDIN SIDDIQUI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shailu Pandit and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shailu Pandit and 3 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

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

Arvind Agarwal Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Hakimuddin @ Kallu and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home Department and another

Virendar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nijakat and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another