Application under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of charge sheet and summoning order. Court noted prosecutrix in court stated allegations were false. Proceedings stayed pending counter affidavit.
Further proceedings stayed pending filing of counter and rejoinder affidavits.
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.
Court No. - 11
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 524 of 2024
Applicant :- Samad Habeeb Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ghufran Hussain Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Ghufran Hussain, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Vishwanath Nishad, learned State counsel for the opposite party no.1.
Issue notice to opposite party no.2.
This petition has been filed for quashing of the charge sheet no. 295 of 2021, dated 06.04.2021 as well as summoning order dated 04.10.2021 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.18, Barabanki in Case No.30079 of 2021, State vs. Samad Habeeb and the entire proceedings thereof pending before the Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C. No. 36, Barabanki in Sessions Case No. 1125 of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No. 0137 of 2021, under Sections 363, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Barabanki.
Learned counsel for petitoners has stated that false and misconceive FIR bearing no.0137 of 2021, under Sections 363, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Barabanki has been lodged against the petitioner by the opposite party no.2 o 04.02.2021. The allegations so levelled in the FIR are false and misconceive. The statement of prosecutrix has been recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. (annexure no.5) wherein she has not levelled any allegation against the present petitioner, rather she has stated that she had left her house alone, went to Delhi to search out any private job, thereafter she went to Punjab for the same purpose but when she could not get any job, she returned to her place. She has categorically stated that no one has committed any wrong against her. Further, while recording her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she has reiterated her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. as she did level any allegation against any one. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further stated that the parents of the prosecutrix is inhabit of lodging false and misconceive FIR against innocent persons having ulterior motive and extraneous design in her mind.
Attention has been drawn towards one FIR bearing no.0088 of 2021, under Section 363 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Barabanki which was lodged by wife of opposite party no.2 on 21.01.2021 against two persons, namely, Pintoo and Manish on the same allegations which have been levelled against the present petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that FIR against the Pintoo and Manish has been lodged on 21.01.2021 whereas the FIR against the petitioner has been lodged on 04.02.2021 on the same allegations. He has also drawn attention of this Court towards the statement of prosecutrix recorded before the court on 20.11.2023 wherein she has not levelled any allegations against the petitioner; rather she maintained her statement which has been recorded before the police and court earlier under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has also drawn attention of this Court towards the FIR bearing no.0392 of 2021, under Sections 323, 506 IPC, Police station Kotwali, District Barabanki which has been lodged by the prosecutrix on 06.04.2021 against her parents levelling allegations that they are forcing her to get married with someone but she is not at the marriageable age, therefore, she is not willing to get married.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that foundation of the impugned FIR is false and bogus but the Investigating Agency after conclusion of the investigation filed charge sheet against the petitioner under Sections 363, 504, 506 and 366 IPC and the trial court has taken cognizance of the aforesaid charge sheet and issued summon against the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has also stated that pursuant to summoning order the petitioner appeared before the court concerned. He has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 22.03.2021 in Bail Application No.3483 of 2021. The petitioner is participating in the trial proceedings but as soon as the prosecutrix recorded her statement on 20.11.2023 as PW-2 wherein she has deposed before the court that the petitioner has not committed any wrong with her and the allegations so levelled against the petitioner are false and misconceive, the petitioner has filed present petition for quashing the proceedings.
Matter requires consideration.
Let a counter affidavit be filed within four weeks. Rejoinder affidavit if any may be filed within two weeks thereafter.
List this case in the week commencing 11th March, 2024 within top ten cases.
Till the next date of listing, further proceedings of Sessions Case No.1125 of 2022; State vs. Samad Habeeb arising out of Case Crime No.0137 of 2021, under Sections 363, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Barabanki shall remain stayed.
Order Date :- 24.1.2024 Renu/-
Digitally signed by :- RENU AGARWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceedings arising out of Sections 363, 504, 506 IPC should be quashed under Section 482 CrPC.
Samad Habeeb
Rajesh Singh Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
3 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
