Dismissed

Subhash Dua v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC9 Jul 2024A482/19218/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

HC Allahabad dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash proceedings under Sections 2 and 3 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act. The court held that prima facie material established the applicant provided rooms for commercial gain during a raid, and fact questions were for the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash charge-sheet and cognizance order was dismissed.

Subhash Dua vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:123664

¶2

Court No. - 80

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19218 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Subhash Dua Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjive Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused material on record.

¶7

The instant application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge-sheet no. 549 of 2022, dated 08.12.2022 and cognizance order dated 02.04.2024 as well as entire proceeding of Criminal Case No.11995 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No.556 of 2022, under Section 2/3 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, P.S. Civil Lines, District Budaun, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Budaun.

¶8

As per prosecution version, the first information report was lodged by the opposite party no.2 alleging therein that on an information, a raid was conducted in Ajanta Hotel where they caught some ladies and gents in compromising position in hotel rooms and on inquiry it was found that they had taken rooms from applicant.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that; the applicant is a Manager of the said hotel; the allegations made against the applicant in FIR, is false and frivolous; the applicant has no concern with the alleged offence; no case under Section 2/3 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act is made out against the applicant;

¶10

the charge-sheet was submitted without considering the facts and circumstances of the case and evidence on record and cognizance was taken. The impugned order is patently illegal, arbitrary, erroneous and not sustainable in the eye of law and thus, liable to be quashed.

¶11

Per-contra , learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submits that there are serious allegations under Section 2/3 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act against the applicant. The applicant is a Manager of the said hotel he has provided rooms for illegal commercial gain, therefore, no case for quashing of the impugned proceedings is made out against the applicant.

¶12

In the instant matter, the submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant call for determination on questions of fact which may be adequately adjudicated upon only by the trial court. Adjudication of questions of facts and appreciation of evidence or examining the reliability and credibility of the version, does not fall within the arena of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In view of the material on record it can also not be held that the impugned criminal proceeding are manifestly attended with mala fide and maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge. Similarly no such illegality, perversity or any other substantial error could be pointed out in the impugned summoning order, so as to warrant any interference by this court in exercise of powers u/s 482 Cr.P.C.

¶13

Perusal of record and on examination of document placed before the Court, its prima-facie established that on a raid conducted by the police officer in Ajanta Hotel, some ladies and gents were caught in compromising position and on an inquiry it was found

¶14

that the applicant-Manager of the said hotel, has given rooms to them by taking Rs. 1500 from them, therefore, the case under Section 2/3 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act is made out against the applicant. Keeping in view the involvement of applicant in immoral act for commercial gain, no case for quashing of impugned proceedings is made out.

¶15

The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed .

¶16

Order Date :- 1.8.2024 A. Tripathi

¶17

Justice Vinod Diwakar

¶18

Digitally signed by :- AKHILESH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Subhash Dua v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhash Dua 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt Nanki and Another vs State of Up and 3 Others

Rajendra Singh Alias Raju Yadav Alias Rajendra Yadav vs State of Up and Another

Lavsher and Another vs State of Up and 2 Others

Sunil Dutt vs State of Up and Another

Niraj @ Banti Shahi and 3 Others vs State of Upand Another

Awdhesh Kumar vs State of U.P.