Disposed

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

Allahabad HC12 Dec 2024A482/11301/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant challenged an order and charge sheet in a matrimonial dispute involving Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and D.P. Act, alleging mechanical filing and intent to victimize. The court issued notice, stayed proceedings, and listed the matter for hearing.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings stayed pending notice to the private respondent and further hearing.

Ramchandra and 2 Others vs State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 13

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11301 of 2024 Applicant :- Ramchandra And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶5

The present application has been filed with the prayer to quash the order dated 07.09.2024 passed by Civil Judge (J.D.)/ F.T.C.(C.A.W), Sitapur as well as charge sheet dated 07.06.2024 arising out of case crime No.40 of 2024 under section 323,504,506,498-A IPC & section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District- Sitapur.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the marriage of applicant no.1 was solemnized with the private respondent and due to some trivial issues, one FIR bearing case crime no.180 of 2016 under sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of DP Act was lodged at P.S. Sadarpur, District Sitapur, in which, the charge sheet was submitted by the Investigating Officer in the most mechanical manner. Thereafter, FIR of case question was lodged on 12.05.2024, with the identical offence only with the intention to victimize the applicants which is glaring misuse of legal provisions. He further relied on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 and requested for kind indulgence of this court.

¶7

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer of applicant and submitted that after detailed investigation, charge sheet has been submitted but he did not dispute this fact that genesis of the case is matrimonial dispute.

¶8

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, going through the contents of application, judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicants as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that earlier one FIR was lodged related to the matrimonial dispute, and after sometime, second FIR was lodged, therefore, matter requires consideration.

¶9

Issue notice to the private respondent returnable at an early

¶10

date.

¶11

List this case in the third week of February, 2025.

¶12

Till the next date, impugned proceeding shall remain stayed.

¶13

Order Date :- 12.12.2024 V. Sinha

¶14

Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ramchandra 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?

Ramchandra 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chandra Praksh Tripathi vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Quraisha Bano and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

X- Juvenile vs State of Up and 3 Others

X- Juvenile vs State of U.P. and Another

X- Juvenile vs State of Up and 3 Others

Ajay Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another