The applicant challenged the high court order refusing to quash proceedings and dispensing with witnesses. The court held that under Section 482 CrPC, the High Court must examine cogency of evidence and availability of witnesses before quashing criminal proceedings initiated under Section 340 CrPC.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:23327
Court No. - 27
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2187 of 2024
Applicant :- Pooja Baranwal And 7 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Deptt. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Sukh Deo Singh,Paritosh Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Acchita Devraj,Saurabh Upadhyay
Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
सतमदर ि कश ु मप ् र ा अन ं वतल बनपम सश ्रा ्री . बश ्री . आई ., (2021) 10 एससशसश ्री 773 मम अविधिप् र ारित वविधधिक धसद्धप्रानंतनों कके आलतोक मम शश्रीघ्रतप्रापसूविरक वनणर्थीत वकयप्रा जप्रायकेगप्रा।
(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)
Order Date :- 15.3.2024 Himanshu
Digitally signed by :- HIMANSHU SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
3 issues framed by the court
Whether quashing of proceedings against the applicant is justified given lack of cogent evidence and absence of witnesses.
Whether the trial court erred in allowing witnesses to appear despite Section 482 CrPC criteria.
Whether the statement under Section 340 CrPC is sufficient to sustain the charge of cheating.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
N.P. SankhlaReferred¶18
(2021) 10 SC 773
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Pooja Baranwal And 7 Others
State Of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Deptt. And Another
Subhash Vidyarthi
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
