Pulkit Bajpai Vs State of Up and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:107276

Court No. - 76

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19700 of 2024

Applicant :- Pulkit Bajpai Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings, including charge-sheet dated 24.08.2023 and cognizance/summoning order dated 13.12.2023, of Case No. 188552 of 2023, arising out of case crime no. 31 of 2023, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the court Additional Civil Judge (JD), Court No. 7, Kanpur Nagar.

¶8

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the allegations levelled against the applicant are wholly false and no prima facie case is made out against him. The applicant is husband of informant/victim and their marriage has taken place on 05.02.2023. The allegations of dowry demand and harassment of victim are wholly false. Learned counsel has referred the chargesheet, wherein Investigating Officer has observed that during investigation it was found that victim was having affair with some boy and she has married with applicant under pressure of her family members and the matter is not of dowry demand and harassment of victim but despite these observations, the Investigating Officer has submitted the charge-sheet against the applicant. It was submitted that in view of the said observations of

¶9

the Investigating Officer, no prima facie case is made out against the applicant and thus, the impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and argued that in the first information report as well as in her statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C., informant/victim has clearly stated that she was harassed by the applicant on account of demand of a car and Rs. 5 lacs cash. She has further alleged that applicant and his family members have assaulted her with legs and fists. It was submitted that in view of the allegations made in the first information report and the statements of informant/victim and other witnesses, a prima facie case is made out against the applicant.

¶11

I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record.

¶12

The legal position on the issue of quashing of criminal proceedings is well-settled that the jurisdiction to quash a complaint, FIR or a charge-sheet should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases. However, where the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint and material on record even if taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused, the charge-sheet may be quashed in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. In well celebrated judgement reported in AIR 1992 SC 605 State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal , Supreme Court has carved out certain guidelines, wherein FIR or proceedings may be quashed but cautioned that the power to quash FIR or proceedings should be exercised sparingly and that too in the rarest of rare cases.

¶13

In the instant matter, perusal of record shows that

¶14

informant/victim has made clear allegations that applicant and his family members have harassed her on account of dowry demand and they have also assaulted her. It is correct that in the chargesheet, the Investigating Officer has made observation that victim was having affair with some boy and she has performed marriage with applicant under pressure of her family members and that it is not a case of dowry demand and harassment but the matter requires adjudication on questions of fact, which is not permissible at this stage in the proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶15

Considering entire facts and circumstances of the case and perusing the impugned charge-sheet and the materials in support of the same, this Court does not find it to be a case which can be determined or gone into in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. This Court cannot hold a parallel trial in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Considering material on record and position of settled law as laid down in the case of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 and Rajeev Kourav vs. Bhaisahab & Ors. , (2020)3 SCC 317, no case for quashing of impugned proceedings/charge-sheet and cognizance/summoning order is made out.

¶16

In view of the aforesaid, the prayer as made above, is hereby refused.

¶17

However, in case applicant files an appropriate application for discharge before the trial court concerned within a period of four weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously, in accordance with settled law. For a period of four

¶18

weeks from today and in case, such an application seeking discharge is filed within the aforesaid period, till the disposal of such application, no coercive action shall be taken against applicant, provided applicant co-operates in early disposal of the application.

¶19

With the aforesaid observations, the instant application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of.

¶20

Order Date :- 2.7.2024 Anand

¶21

Digitally signed by :- ANAND VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pulkit Bajpai v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pulkit Bajpai v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases