Disposed

Naman Dwivedi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC19 Mar 2024A482/2645/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an interim order under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J. did not pass a final decision on the prayer to quash the summoning order and criminal proceedings. The court directed the opposite party to file a counter affidavit within four weeks, listed the matter for further hearing, and stayed coercive steps against the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

directions for counter affidavit and stay of coercive steps; matter listed for further hearing.

Naman Dwivedi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 11

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2645 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Naman Dwivedi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Pathak,Samidha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Ms. Samidha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pushan Upadhyay, learned State Counsel.

¶6

Issue notice to opposite party no. 4, returnable at an early date.

¶7

Steps be taken within a week.

¶8

Office to proceed accordingly.

¶9

This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 02.06.2023 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow in Criminal Case No. 62324 of 2023 (State Vs. Ashutosh Kumar Tripathi and Another) and chargesheet dated 15.05.2023 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 62324 of 2023, concerning Case Crime No. 62 of 2022, under Sections 409 and 420 IPC, Police Station Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow, pending in the court of learned CJM, Lucknow.

¶10

At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the petitioner has falsely been implicated as she has not committed any offence as alleged. She has falsely been implicated as she is not the director of the Company of her husband. She has nothing to do with the Company of her husband.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that if the allegations in the FIR are taken on its face value, the same are mainly of civil in nature, so as to exert the pressure, the impugned FIR has been lodged implicating the petitioner falsely. She has further submitted that when the impugned FIR was lodged, the petitioner approached this Court by filing a writ petition bearing Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 5908 of 2022 (Naman Dwivedi Vs. State of U.P. and 3 others), wherein the interim order has been granted to the petitioner on 24.08.2022 and the matter was referred to the Mediation & Conciliation Centre of this Court vide order dated 02.03.2023 indicating therein that the dispute is purely civil in nature. Ms. Samidha

¶12

has stated that the matter could not be settled in the Mediation Centre.

¶13

The matter requires consideration.

¶14

Let the counter affidavit be filed within a period of four weeks. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may also be filed within a period of two weeks thereafter.

¶15

List in the week commencing 13th of May, 2024.

¶16

Till the next date of listing, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner in Criminal Case No. 62324 of 2023 (supra).

¶17

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

¶18

Order Date :- 19.3.2024 kkv/

¶19

Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Naman Dwivedi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naman Dwivedi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. U.P. and 3 Others

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

Mohammad Wahid vs the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Others

Sushma Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Govt. Lko and 8 Others

Om Prakash Gupta and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Juvenile X, in Case Crime No. 249/2020 Thru. Mother vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and 3 Others

Vinay Pratap Singh and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Mohammad Israr and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Govt. of U.P. Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another