Dismissed

Smt Mahadevi and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC27 Jan 2023A482/875/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings. The court held that since a charge sheet was filed, re-adjudicating the alleged vendetta ground was unnecessary. Proceedings remain intact but accused-petitioners were offered bail if they surrender within twenty days.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; accused-petitioners allowed to apply for anticipatory bail by surrendering within twenty days.

Smt Mahadevi and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 87

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 875 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Smt Mahadevi And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manisha Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned AGA for the State.

¶6

Present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 7213/IX/2019 (State vs Mahadevi and other) arising out of Case Crime No.22 of 2019, under Sections 386, 506 IPC, Police Station Raya, District Mathura as well as charge sheet dated 21.02.2019 and the cognizance order dated 18.10.2019 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 1st, Mathura.

¶7

Petitioners had approached this Court earlier by filing Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No 3041 of 2019 taking the same ground. This Court however vide order dated 05.02.2019 did not interfere in the said petition but provided that petitioners should not be arrested in the FIR in question till submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C.

¶8

The charge sheet has already been filed. In this petition, the same ground has been urged that there is civil dispute pending between the parties and the FIR is nothing but result of personal vendetta of the respondent no.2 against the petitioners.

¶9

Investigating agency after collecting the evidence had filed charge sheet. Once this Court has not found substance in the said ground, there is no question of again adjudicating the present petition on the same ground that there is personal vendetta of the respondent no.2 against the petitioners for which the FIR and the impugned proceedings have been instituted.

¶10

In view thereof, I do not find any substance in the present petition and it is hereby dismissed .

¶11

However, it is provided that if the accused-petitioners surrender before the court concerned within twenty days from today and apply for anticipatory bail/regular bail, which shall be considered expeditiously, in accordance with law.

¶12

Order Date :- 27.1.2023 A.Kr.

¶13

Digitally signed by :- AJAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt Mahadevi and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Mahadevi 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. Anand Swarup Vs Govt. of U.P. and Another

Mohammad Shahid Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arun Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Hema and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ishtiyak @ Nanhu and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dheeraj Shahu Vs State of U.P. and Another