Pranjul Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another
Case brief
What is this about?
In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a charge sheet and summons in a case involving sexual harassment and POSCO allegations, the High Court held that adjudicating factual disputes related to the credibility of the FIR and allegations was the exclusive domain of the trial court. The court found a prima facie case existed, declining to interfere with the commencement of the trial to
What did the court decide?
The prayer for quashing the charge sheet, cognizance order, and the entire criminal proceedings was refused to the applicant.
What the court decided
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:106061
Court No. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5456 of 2023
Applicant :- Pranjul Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shivanand Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sarvesh Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Shivanand Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pankaj Srivastava, learned AGA for the State, Sri Sarvesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 03.09.2022 and cognizance along with summoning order dated 13.01.2023 in Session Case No. 378 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 91 of 2022, under Sections 354, 294, 323, 354Ga, 506 IPC and Section 11/12 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, "the POCSO Act"), Police Station Kidwai Nagar, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the Court of Additional District Judge-25, Kanpur Nagar.
Brief facts of the case are that a first information report (for short, "the FIR") has been lodged by mother of the victim on 01.05.2022 at 22:54 Hrs. under Sections 354, 294, 323, 354(C), 506 IPC and 7 & 8 of the POCSO Act, against the applicant, who resides in front of house of the applicant. The FIR came to be registered as Case Crime No. 0091 of 2022 against the applicant with an allegation that her 17 years old daughter Anushka was being teased by the applicant, while going to school. On making a complaint to anyone regarding above incident, he also used to threaten to kill her by pouring acid or
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should exercise jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the charge sheet and proceedings which constitute an abuse of process of law.
Whether the facts and circumstances make out a prima facie case against the applicant requiring trial by the trial court rather than quashing at the pre-trial stage.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Pranjul Yadav
- respondent
State of U.P.
- respondent
Another
- other
victim
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · May
- Registered
- Case no.
- A482/5456/2023
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court