Remanded

Diksha Kumari @ Diksha v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Nov 2024A482/10376/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Section 482 Cr.P.C. application to quash proceedings and a summoning order, the court issued notice to the opposite party, directed filing of affidavits, and suspended the summoning order specifically against the applicant pending disposition.

What did the court decide?

Impugned summoning order dated 11.07.2024 to stay execution qua applicant only pending return of notice and filing of affidavits.

Diksha Kumari @ Diksha vs State of U.P. Thru… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 14

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10376 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Diksha Kumari @ Diksha Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home U.P. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Moni Yadav,Rahul Kumar

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.

¶6

Heard Ms. Moni Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to quash/set aside the entire proceedings of the Complaint Case No.2355 of 2023 : Ram Asarey vs. Diksha , under Section 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Sadar, District Unnao as well as impugned summoning order dated 11.07.2024 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Unnao (Crime Against Women).

¶8

Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent who has been falsely implicated in the present case by the opposite party No.2. Her further submission is that the impugned summoning order dated 11.07.2024 is not in conformity with the statement of the complainant/opposite party no.2 recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and statements of witnesses, Rekha Vishwakarma (P.W.1) and Rekha (P.W.2) recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C. The learned trial Court while passing the impugned summoning

¶9

order has failed to appreciate the fact that the complainant's version of the incident, as stated in the complaint, is not substantiated by the statement of the complainant recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and the statement of witnesses recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C. Thus, that even prima facie no offence is disclosed against the applicant, despite this fact, she has been summoned to face the trial which is nothing but malicious prosecution and an abuse of the process of the Court.

¶10

Her further submission is that the impugned summoning order dated 11.07.2024 is an outcome of non application of judicial mind by the learned trial Court. Learned trial court has failed to appreciate the fact that the applicant herein is none other than the wife of the opposite party No.2- Ram Asarey, who has already filed a case bearing F.I.R. No.0177 of 2023 for the offence under Sections 498-A, 323, 354, 506, 406 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Chakeri District Kanpur against opposite party No.2 and his family members, in which after due investigation, the police has filed the chargesheet dated 07.07.2023 against four accused persons including the opposite party No.2, copies of F.I.R. No.177 of 22023 and chargesheet dated 07.07.2023 are annexed as Annexure Nos.2 and 3 to the instant application. Therefore, the present complaint against the applicant is nothing but an attempt to exert undue pressure to settle the dispute. She thus submits that the impugned criminal

¶11

proceeding deserves to be quashed.

¶12

Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State has vehemently opposed the aforesaid prayer. However, she could not dispute the factual submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶13

Having heard learned counsel for parties and keeping in view the submissions advanced by them, the matter requires consideration.

¶14

Issue notice to opposite party no.2, returnable at an early date.

¶15

Steps be taken within a week.

¶16

Let counter affidavit be filed within six weeks.

¶17

Two week's time thereafter shall be available to learned counsel for the applicant to file rejoinder affidavit.

¶18

List immediately after expiry of the eight weeks.

¶19

Meanwhile, impugned summoning order dated 11.07.2024 and any process issued, pursuant thereto, shall not be given effect to qua the present applicant- Diksha Kumari @ Diksha only.

¶20

(Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I, J.)

¶21

Order Date :- 19.11.2024 Shubhankar

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SHUBHANKAR THAKUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Diksha Kumari @ Diksha v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Diksha Kumari @ Diksha v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Adesh Singh @ Jeetu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Farzana Tabassum Rahmani ( in Fir Farzana Tabassum) vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Mahesh Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Bechelal Gautam and others vs state of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home and another

Virendra Verma and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P. and Another

Sarvesh Kumar and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./ Prin. Secy. / Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko and Another