Dismissed

Smt. Farida Bano v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC22 Mar 2023A482/8820/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed as a duplicate petition with false averments. A withdrawal request based on the same defect and filed by the same counsel was also rejected, with an exemplary cost imposed on the applicant.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. dismissed with exemplary cost of Rs. 1,00,000 imposed on the applicant. Application for withdrawal rejected.

Smt. Farida Bano Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8820 of 2023 Applicant :- Smt. Farida Bano Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Subhash Chander Dwivedi

¶3

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

1. Heard Sri Subhash Chander Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ankit Srivastava, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

¶6

2. On 16.03.2023 the following order was passed:-

¶7

“List revised.

¶8

Sri Shashikant Pandey, learned counsel for the State is present.

¶9

The matter was taken up at 12 pm in the revised call. Sri Subhash Chander Dwivedi, Advocate had appeared before the Court to press this petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. The Stamp Reporter had reported that an application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. had previously been filed by the applicant being Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 1187 of 2023 ( Smt. Farida Bano vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others). The matter was thus posted after lunch by communicating learned counsel about the said report and he was directed to produce the copy of the order passed in the same. The matter has been called thrice since then post lunch.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has not appeared even at any of the call post lunch. There is no representation on behalf of the applicant when the matter is now taken up in the third call.

¶11

Let the matter be posted on 22nd March, 2023 as the first case in the cause-list before this Court.

¶12

Office to connect the present application with Criminal Misc. Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 1187 of 2023 (Smt. Farida Bano vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others).”

¶13

3. The present application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant- Smt. Farida Bano with the following prayer:-

¶14

"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to quash the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 14010 of 2010 (Shamshuddin.. vs. Farida Bano), under Sections 379, 451 I.P.C. pending in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Div.) First / Judicial Magistrate, Jaunpur.

¶15

It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to stay the further proceeding of Complaint Case No. 14010 of 2010 (Shamshuddin.. vs. Farida Bano) pending in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Div.) First / Judicial Magistrate, Jaunpur.

¶16

It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to stay the further proceeding of Complaint Case No. 14010 of 2010 (Shamshuddin..

¶17

¶18

vs. Farida Bano) pending in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Div.) First / Judicial Magistrate, Jaunpur. During the pendency of the present application U/S 482 of the Cr.P.C. otherwise the applicant shall suffer a irreparable loss and injury And / or pass such other and further orders which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

¶19

4. The order passed in the same on 16.03.2023 is in detail enumerating the circumstances and also the fact that the Stamp Reporter had reported a previous petition being filed by the applicant for the same reliefs.

¶20

5. Today the matter is placed before this Court which is connected with the previous petition being Application U/S 482 No. 1187 of 2023 (Farida Bano vs. State of U.P. and 3 others). The records of the said connected matter show that the said petition has been filed by the applicant Farida Bano before this Court with the following prayers:-

¶21

“It is, therefore, Most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the summoning order dated 8.12.2022 (Annexure No. 1) passed by Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Division)/First Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 41, Jaunpur in Case No. 14010 of 2021, under Sections 379, 451 I.P.C., Police Station Line Bazar, District Jaunpur.

¶22

It is further prayed that during the pendency of this application the further proceeding of abovenoted case may kindly be stayed. And / or pass such other and further order as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, otherwise the applicant shall suffer a irreparable loss and injury.”

¶23

The said petition stands disposed by an order dated 23.01.2023 passed by this Court. The said order is quoted herein below:-

¶24

“List revised.

¶25

Heard Sri Subhash Chander Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri S.B. Maurya, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

¶26

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Farida Bano with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 8.12.2022 (Annexure No. 1) passed by Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Division)/First Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 41, Jaunpur in Case No. 14010 of 2021, under Sections 379, 451 I.P.C., Police Station Line Bazar, District Jaunpur and with further prayer to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case, during pendency of the present application.

¶27

At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant states that the purpose of the applicant would suffice if an order is passed directing the trial court to decide the bail application of the applicant, as expeditiously as possible. He further states that although the prayer has been made for quashing of the summoning order in the case but he does not press the same. He further states that the applicant shall raise all the questions before the trial court.

¶28

Learned counsel for the State has no objection of aforesaid arguments of learned counsel for the applicant.

¶29

¶30

In view of the above, the prayer for quashing of the summoning order is dismissed as not pressed.

¶31

However, in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the limited prayer of learned counsel for the applicant, it is directed that if the accused-applicant surrenders before the trial court and applies for bail within three weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law. Till the aforesaid period, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant.

¶32

It it clarified that if the accused-applicant does not appear before the court concerned by the said date, the court concerned shall proceed against her in accordance with law.

¶33

The present application is disposed of.”

¶34

6. In the present petition the affidavit is of the applicant Smt. Farida Bano who describes herself the sole applicant. In the previous petition being being Application U/S 482 No. 1187 of 2023 also the affidavit was of the applicant Smt. Farida Bano who was the sole applicant therein.

¶35

7. In the present petition in paragraph 2 it has been averred that this is the first 482 petition being filed by the applicant before this Court and no Criminal Misc. application has either been pending or has been filed by the applicant. The said paragraph has been sworn on the personal knowledge of the applicant / deponent. The same reads as under:-

¶36

“2. That this is the first Criminal Misc. Application Under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant before this Hon'ble Court and no any other case has been filed earlier or pending before this Hon'ble Court or Lucknow Bench for the same relief.”

¶37

8. Thus the situation which arises is that the present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is the second petition being filed by the applicant who is the deponent in the same and was the deponent even in the previous application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. for the same reliefs and there is a false averment in paragraph 2 that it is the first application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant before this Court and no petition is pending or has been filed by the applicant.

¶38

9. Learned counsel for the applicant argued and placed before the Court a Criminal Misc. Withdrawal Application No.1 of 2023 dated 18.03.2023 with the prayer that the present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. be dismissed as withdrawn. The said prayer is quoted herein below:-

¶39

“It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow the present application and dismiss as withdrawn the aforesaid Criminal Misc. Application No. 8820 of 2023 (Smt. Farida Bano Vs. State of U.P. and others) otherwise the applicant shall suffer a irreparable loss and injury.”

¶40

¶41

10. A perusal of the affidavit in support of the present case goes to show that the said affidavit is of the applicant who is the deponent in the 482 petition. The said affidavit is defective affidavit as in the swearing clause the entire paragraph which had to be sworn had been kept blank.

¶42

11. Looking to the false averment in paragraph 2 of the present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C., this Court rejects the application for withdrawal. The Criminal Misc. Withdrawal Application No.1 of 2023 this stands rejected.

¶43

12. In so far as filing of the second petition is concerned, there is even one more glaring circumstance that both the petitions have been filed by the same learned counsel.

¶44

13. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is hereby dismissed with an exemplary cost of Rs. 1,00,000/- which is imposed upon the applicant who is the deponent of the same to be paid within 30 days from today before the Registrar General of this Court which shall be transmitted to the High Court Legal Service Committee for its utilization therein. In the event the said amount is not deposited, the Registrar General shall take up appropriate steps for getting the same realized as land revenue through the District Magistrate / Collector concerned who shall as early as possible realise the same and transmit it to the Registrar General of this Court which shall be utilized as stated above.

¶45

Order Date :- 22.3.2023 AS Rathore

¶46

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶47

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Farida Bano v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Farida Bano v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

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

Anoop Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dheeraj Jindal Vs Central Bureau of Investigation and 3 Others

Sonu Chauhan and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Tej Prakash Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shyam Mohan Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Abu Faiza and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another