Dismissed

Rohit Yadav and 2 Others v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC8 Jul 2024A482/21215/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court refused an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash FIR/charge-sheet in a dowry harassment case. The court held that a prima facie case existed and factual disputes must be adjudicated by the trial court, denying the prayer but granting suspension of coercive action if applicants surrender.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing of charge-sheet proceeded dismissed; directive issued for expeditious bail consideration upon surrender within four weeks.

Rohit Yadav and 2 Others vs State of Up… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:110094

¶2

Court No. - 76

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 21215 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Rohit Yadav And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajnath Ydav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on.

¶7

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings, including charge-sheet dated 19.11.2022 as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 03.04.2023, of Case No. 2857 of 2023 (State vs. Rohit Yadav and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 241 of 2022, under Sections - 498-A, 323, 504, 406 I.P.C. and Section - 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station - Saini, District - Kaushambi, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaushambi.

¶8

It has been submitted by learned counsel for applicants that applicants are innocent and no prima facie case is made out against them. Applicant no.1 is husband and applicant no.2 and 3 fatherin-law and mother-in-law of victim and the allegations of dowry demand and harassment of victim levelled against applicants are wholly false. It was submitted that only general allegations have been levelled against all the accused persons. The allegation that applicants used to demand Rs.5 lakhs or that they have tried to burn the victim, are wholly false. It was further submitted that no prima facie case is made out against the applicants.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that applicants are main accused and there are allegations that they used to harass the victim on account of demand of Rs.5 lakhs and that applicant no.2 was having evil eye on the victim. It was submitted that in view of the allegations levelled in the first information report and the material collected during investigation, a prima facie case is made out against them.

¶10

I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record.

¶11

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. In this connection, a reference may also be made to the case of R. Kalyani vs. Janak C. Mehta and Others, 2009 (1) SCC 516, Rupan Deol Bajaj vs. K.P.S. Gill (1995) SCC (Cri) 1059, Rajesh Bajaj vs. State of NCT of Delhi, (1999) 3 SCC 259 and Medchl Chemicals & Pharma (P) Ltd vs. Biological E Ltd. & Ors, 2000 SCC (Cri) 615 . It has been held that if a prima facie case is made out disclosing ingredients of the offence, court should not quash the charge sheet/complaint. It is equally well settled that at this stage questions of fact cannot be

¶12

examined and a mini trial cannot be held. In the instant matter, there are allegations that the victim/informant was harassed by the accused persons on account of dowry. Considering the allegations made in the first information report and the material collected during investigation, it cannot be said that no prima facie case is made out against the applicants. The submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicants call for determination on questions of fact, which may adequately be discerned/adjudicated only by the trial court. Even the submissions made on point of law can also be more appropriately gone into by the trial court. In the instant matter, in view of allegations made in the first information report and the material collected during investigation, it cannot be said that no prima facie case is made out against the applicants. At this stage, the matter cannot be examined meticulously. Hence, the prayer for quashing of impugned proceedings/charge-sheet is refused.

¶13

However, considering the facts of the matter, it is directed that in case, applicants appear/surrender before the court concerned within a period of four weeks from today and apply for bail, their bail application shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with settled law. For a period of four weeks from today or till the applicants appear/surrender before the court concerned, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

¶14

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

¶15

Order Date :- 8.7.2024 S Rawat

¶16

Digitally signed by :- SHOBHIT RAWAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rohit Yadav and 2 Others v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Yadav and 2 Others v. State of Up 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

Ashu Dubey vs State of Up and Another

Ravi Verma vs State of U.P. and Another

Prevendra and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Sataya Prakash Verma and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Tarkeshwar Modanwal vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mohit Kumar and 7 Others vs State of U.P. and Another