Sudhakar Tripathi v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Lko and 3 Others

Allahabad HC22 Jul 2024A482/5298/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash charge sheet and summoning order in FIR registered under Sections 504, 506, and 507 IPC arising from a property dispute. The applicant sought quashing of proceedings based on a mobile message alleged to be threatening, which the Court characterized as persuasion for amicable settlement.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings stayed till next listing date; notice issued.

Sudhakar Tripathi vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 11

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5298 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Sudhakar Tripathi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- In Person Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Sudhakar Tripathi in person, as well as Shri S.P. Tiwari, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and perused the records.

¶6

By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant has sought quashing of the charge sheet dated 03.10.2023 submitted in furtherance of FIR no. 240 of 2023 under Sections 504, 506, 507 registered at Police Station - Gosaiganj, District - Ayodhya and the summoning order passed by the court of Civil Judge (S.D.)/F.T.C./A.C.J.M., Ayodhya/Faizabad in furtherance of the aforesaid charge sheet.

¶7

The opposite party no. 2 lodged the FIR no. 240 of 2023 on 05.09.2023 alleging that several property disputes are pending in various court's between the parties, who are related to each other. The applicant keeps on pressurizing the opposite party no. 2 and his children to enter into a settlement in the dispute. On 15.05.2023, he sent a threatening message on the mobile phone of son of the informant, who was frightened after receiving the message and the opposite party no. 2 also fell ill due to the message and he had to be admitted to a hospital.

¶8

A copy of the relevant extract of case diary has been annexed with the application wherein the message has been reproduced, which is as follows:-

¶9

"If your are reluctant, then it's ok, but this is a chance to settle the dispute on mutual understanding if you think and find it right. I would follow my own path in absence of your reply but that would definitely be not in your interest, a will wait for a few moment"

¶10

A perusal of the aforesaid message prima facie indicates that it is in no way a threatening message and it merely appears to be a persuasion for amicable settlement of the dispute between the parties.

¶11

The matter requires consideration.

¶12

Issue notice to the opposite party no. 2 returnable at an early

¶13

date.

¶14

The applicant in person shall take necessary steps in this regard within a period of three days.

¶15

Learned Counsel for the opposite parties may file their counter affidavit within a period of two weeks.

¶16

Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed by the applicant within a period of one week thereafter.

¶17

List/Put up this case in the week commencing 22.07.2024.

¶18

Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, it is provided that till the next date of listing, the proceedings in charge sheet dated 03.10.2023 submitted in furtherance of FIR no. 240 of 2023 under Sections 504, 506, 507 registered at Police Station - Gosaiganj, District - Ayodhya, shall remain stayed.

¶19

The opposite parties no. 3 & 4 impleaded in the application are the Investigating Officer and the Station House Office who have wrongly been impleaded and the applicant in person is directed to strike out the names of opposite parties no. 3 & 4 while taking steps.

¶20

Order Date :- 6.6.2024 Lokesh Kumar

¶21

[Subhash Vidyarthi, J.]

¶22

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

Sudhakar Tripathi v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudhakar Tripathi v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Lko 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

Dinesh Kumar Yadav @ Dinesh Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Anand Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Arpit Pandey @ Ganesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lucknow

Shivam Singh @ Aryan Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Govt. Lko

Sadan Kumar @ Chandan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Smt. Neelam Gond vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others