Sandhya Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:191270

Court No. - 78

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 41665 of 2024

Applicant :- Sandhya Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Atipriya Gautam,Madhaw Pandey,Sneh Madhur,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent, and perused the record.

¶7

The instant application has been preferred with the prayer to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 3.6.2023 & 13.10.2023 in Case No.94847 of 2024 titled State v. Sandhya Yadav, arising out of Case Crime No.0219 of 2022, u/s 420, 120B IPC and 6/10 of Uttar Pradesh Public Examination Act & 66 of I.T. Act, Police Station Maharajpur, Commissionerate, Kanpur Nagar.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case due to an ulterior motive at behest of informant; the applicant is student and preparing for competitive examination and she is not involved in any of the activity as alleged in the FIR; the instant FIR has been lodged after a delay of about seven months of the date of examination in which the applicant appeared in online written examination; there is no plausible explanation with regard to the delay in lodging the FIR, therefore, the entire prosecution story is based on the surmises and conjectures; the investigation has not been properly conducted by the Investigating Officer, and thereafter, the charge sheet has been filed. Subsequently, the cognizance order was passed on charge

¶9

sheet in a mechanical manner without application of judicial mind, therefore, the entire proceedings initiated against the applicant is vitiated under law.

¶10

Per contra , learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the applicant's submissions and states that the applicant has appeared in an online examination held on 13.11.2021, and the manner in which the applicant attended the question shows her complicity in the crime and the same was done with the help of the Manager of the Computer Centre, and as such the applicant has committed a cognizable offence. Therefore, no case for quashing of the impugned proceedings is made out against the applicant. To substantiate his arguments, learned A.G.A. has drawn attention of the Court to the contents recorded in CD-2 annexed with the application.

¶11

Perusal of record and on examination of document placed before the Court, it's prima-facie established that the applicant was found to have involved in adopting unfair means in online examination with the active aid and assistance of the Manager of the Centre, and as such the applicant has committed a cognizable offence, and the truthfulness of the allegations needs to be tested during the trial, therefore, no case for quashing of impugned proceedings is made out. Prima-facie , ingredients of sections 420, 120B IPC and 6/10 of Uttar Pradesh Public Examination Act & 66 of I.T. Act are made out against the applicant.

¶12

So far as the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicant call for determination on questions of fact which may be adequately adjudicated upon only by the trial court. Adjudication of questions of facts and appreciation of evidence or examining the reliability and credibility of the version, does not fall within the

¶13

arena of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In view of the material on record it can also not be held that the impugned criminal proceeding are manifestly attended with mala fide and maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge. Similarly no such illegality, perversity or any other substantial error could be pointed out in the impugned summoning order, so as to warrant any interference by this court in exercise of powers u/s 482 Cr.P.C.

¶14

The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed.

¶15

Order Date :- 4.12.2024 Anil K. Sharma

¶16

Justice Vinod Diwakar

¶17

Digitally signed by :- ANIL KUMAR SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sandhya Yadav v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandhya Yadav v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases