Disposed

Smt. Ragini Tiwari and 7 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Govt. Sectt. Lko and Another

Allahabad HC19 Nov 2024A482/9472/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An applicant filed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashment of criminal proceedings due to alleged false implication. The court found a prima facie case and declined quashment but permitted the applicant to file a discharge application with directions for expeditious disposal and temporary stay on coercive steps.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashment declined; permission granted to move discharge application; coercive steps stayed for four weeks or duration of discharge application.

Smt. Ragini Tiwari and 7 Others vs State of U.P. Thru… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:75992

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9472 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Smt. Ragini Tiwari And 7 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Govt. Sectt. Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Amol Kumar Srivastava,Shivang Dwivedi,Shivanshu Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. and perused the material available on record.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to quash the proceedings of Criminal Case No.22072 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No. 0492 of 2023 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 323, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Mankapur, District Gonda.

¶8

Learned counsel for applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. It is also contended that Investigating Officer without applying his mind, has wrongly submitted the charge sheet arraying the name of the applicant as an accused. In view of above, this application deserves to be allowed.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. urged that there is sufficient evidence against the applicant and there is no occasion for quashing of the impugned summoning order and proceedings of aforesaid case.

¶10

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, a perusal of record and in the facts and circumstances of the case, a prima facie, case is made out against the applicant. Therefore, prayer for quashing the impugned summoning order as well as proceedings of aforesaid case, is declined.

¶11

After arguing the matter up to some length, learned counsel for the applicant submits that he does not want to press this application on merit and he confines his prayer only to the extent that

¶12

he may be permitted to move discharge application through counsel and suitable directions may be issued for expeditious disposal of the same.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. has no objection in grant of aforesaid prayer.

¶14

In view of above, it is provided that applicant is permitted to move his discharge applications through counsel within four weeks' from today and, in case, any such application is being filed, the same shall be heard and decided expeditiously after hearing the parties, in accordance with law, by means of a reasoned and speaking order.

¶15

Till the aforesaid period of four weeks' and during the pendency of discharge application, no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.

¶16

In case of failure on the part of applicant in moving the discharge application within the aforesaid period, he will not be entitled to the benefit of this order.

¶17

It is clarified that after disposal of discharge application, the applicant will be subject to regular process of the court concerned, including bail etc.

¶18

With the above directions, this application is disposed of .

¶19

Order Date :- 19.11.2024 Gaurav/-

¶20

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Smt. Ragini Tiwari and 7 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Govt. Sectt. Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Ragini Tiwari and 7 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Govt. Sectt. Lko and Another

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

Dilip Chhugani vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Dan Bahadur Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Janardan Bajpai vs Inder Jeet Singh, Administrator / Nagar Ayukt, Nagar Nigam, Lko. and Others

Smt. Naseema Khatoon and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Ministry of Home Affairs and Another

Pankaj Kumar Alias Pankaj Kumar Rawat vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Surendra Kumar Mishra and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Cane Development Lko. and 3 Others