Disposed

Mohammad Tayyab and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC23 Nov 2024A482/10617/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge considered an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C./Section 528 BNSS for quashing domestic violence proceedings. The court issued notice to the opposite party, directed filing of counter affidavits, and granted an interim stay on the criminal case pending hearings.

What did the court decide?

Notice issued to opposite party; counter affidavit and rejoinder directed to be filed within four weeks; interim stay granted on further proceedings in the criminal case.

Mohammad Tayyab and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru… — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 11

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10617 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Mohammad Tayyab And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Abdul Samad,Divya Singh,Sunil Sharma

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶7

Heard Ms Divya Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Avishesh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State/opposite party No.1 and perused the record.

¶8

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C./under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.212 of 2024 (Shama Praveen Versus Mohammad Tayyab and others), under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, Police Station - Kotwali Nagar, District - Sultanpur, pending before learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C. (CAW), Sultanpur. Further, a prayer has also been made for quashing of the order dated 02.07.2024, passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C. (CAW), Sultanpur.

¶9

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants/petitioners that the opposite party No.2 has filed a baseless complaint against the present petitioners without impleading her husband in the complaint. The petitioner No. 1 is the father-in-law, petitioner No.2 is the mother-in-law and petitioner No.3 is the brother-in-law of opposite party No.2. In paragraph 6 of the complaint, the date of the incident is indicated as 19.06.2024, whereas on that date the petitioner No.2 along with petitioner No.3 were at Lucknow for the treatment. Besides, the petitioner No. 1 has ousted the husband of the opposite party No.2, who is son of petitioner No.1, from his all moveable and immovable property, therefore, this complaint has been lodged with ulterior motive.

¶10

Matter requires consideration.

¶11

Issue notice to opposite party No.2 returnable at an early date. Steps to be taken within a week. Office to proceed accordingly.

¶12

Let counter affidavit be filed within four weeks. Rejoinder

¶13

affidavit, if any, may be filed within one week thereafter.

¶14

List this case in the week commencing 6th January, 2025.

¶15

As an interim measure, it is provided that till the next date of listing, further proceedings of Criminal Case No.212 of 2024 (Shama Praveen Versus Mohammad Tayyab and others), under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, Police Station - Kotwali Nagar, District - Sultanpur, pending before learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C. (CAW), Sultanpur shall remain stayed.

¶16

(Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.)

¶17

Order Date :- 23.11.2024 ML/-

¶18

Digitally signed by :- MUNNA LAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohammad Tayyab and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Tayyab and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

Jyoti @ Jyoti Singh vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Sandeep and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko and 4 Others

Arfa Begum vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Ranjna Devi vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others

Saurabh Vishwakarma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Sanjai vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.