Saddam @ Saddam Husain and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC12 Apr 2024A482/3408/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of criminal proceedings arising from a matrimonial dispute. Court found the matter prima facie requiring consideration, issued notice to respondent No.2, and stayed the proceedings pending further orders.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings of Criminal Case No.6658 of 2024 stayed till further orders; notice issued to respondent No.2 with time for counter affidavit and rejoinder.

Saddam @ Saddam Husain and Others vs State of U.P… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3408 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Saddam @ Saddam Husain And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And Another

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Kumar Gaurav Srivastav,Rajeev Kumar Srivastava

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶7

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

¶8

By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicants have sought quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.6658 of 2024 arising out of Charge-sheet No.1 of 2023 dated 31.12.2023 arising out of Case Crime No.281 of 2023 under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506, 427 IPC, Police Station Khodare, Gonda pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gonda.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicant No.1 and 2 are brothers-in-law of respondent No.2. Applicants No.3 and 4 sisters-in-law of respondent No.2. Applicant No.3 is married about 12 years ago with one Afzal Ul Haq and is living separately since then. The dispute between respondent No.2 and her husband is purely matrimonial in nature, however, in order to create pressure, general and sweeping allegations have been leveled in the FIR. No specific role has been attributed to the applicants either in the FIR or in the statement of the prosecution witnesses.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicants has invited attention of the Court towards the charge-sheet which is annexed as Annexure5, which shows that the victim even after being asked by the police to get herself medically examined, she refused to undergo medical examination and her medical examination has

¶11

been conducted after 2 days on 18.12.2023, where no injury has been found except complaint of pain. Impugned proceedings are nothing but abuse of the process of the law.

¶12

Prima facie the matter requires consideration.

¶13

Issue notice to respondent No.2.

¶14

Four weeks' time is granted to the respondents to file counter affidavit. Two weeks' time thereafter shall be available to the applicants to file rejoinder affidavit.

¶15

List on 27.05.2024.

¶16

Till further orders, impugned proceedings of Criminal Case No.6658 of 2024 shall remain stayed.

¶17

Order Date :- 12.4.2024 prateek

¶18

Digitally signed by :- PRATEEK ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Saddam @ Saddam Husain and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saddam @ Saddam Husain and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rajneesh Kumar Srivastava Vs State of U.P. through Its Secy.Deptt.of Edu.Higher and Ors.

Navdeep Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy.Higher Education and Ors.

Kandhai Lal Vs State of U.P.through Secy. Secondary Education Govt. of U.P.

Gopi Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.Home Lko.

Sukhchain Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Shiv Poojan Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Forest Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others