Pavan Kumar Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC22 Oct 2024A482/9497/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of charge sheet and sessions trial under IPC sections 323, 504, 506 and SC/ST Act provisions arising from an F.I.R. alleging the applicant, a lawyer, was falsely implicated after a quarrel between informant and her in-laws. Court issued notice, directed counter affidavit by S.H.O., and stayed coercive steps.

What did the court decide?

Notice to respondent no. 2; counter affidavit directed; no coercive steps against applicant until next listing.

Pavan Kumar Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 13

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9497 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Pavan Kumar Shukla Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Nayak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Standing Counsel.

¶6

The present application has been filed with a prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 30.08.2021 as well as proceedings of S.T. No. 144 of 2021 arising out of F.I.R. No. 125 of 2021, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(da) and 3 (1)(dha) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Jaitpur, District Ambedkar Nagar.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the mother of the applicant was killed by the co-villagers, namely, Neeraj, Manoj and Pradeep, in which case, charge sheet was submitted against them and after conclusion of trial, they were convicted. Due to the said reason, they were annoyed and were in search of a chance to drag the applicant in criminal proceedings. It has also been submitted that the applicant, who is a practicing lawyer, went to his village on 15.07.2021 along with Mr. Rakesh Nayak, Advocate and on hearing noise of the quarrel, which was being taken place in between the complainant of the present case and her inlaws, the applicant reached on the spot and tried to mediate, due to which, the informant felt offended. It is submitted that at the behest of the aforesaid Neeraj, Manoj and Pradeep, the present F.I.R. has been lodged implicating the applicant also. Learned counsel for the applicant vehemently submits that the Investigating Officer filed the charge sheet in mechanical manner without considering

¶8

the evidences of the applicant and, therefore, indulgence of this Court is necessary.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. though opposes the prayer of the applicant, but does not dispute the fact that quarrel was taken place in between the informant and her in-laws and the applicant has been shown as a companion of the father-in-law of the informant.

¶10

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of the application, F.I.R., charge sheet as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that the quarrel was taken place in between the informant and her in-laws and the applicant is shown as a companion of the father-inlaw of the informant.

¶11

In view of above, this Court is of the view that the matter requires consideration.

¶12

Issue notice to respondent no. 2.

¶13

List this case on 11.11.2024.

¶14

By the next date of listing, S.H.O. concerned shall file counter affidavit.

¶15

Till the next date of listing, no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicant.

¶16

Order Date :- 22.10.2024 VKS

¶17

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

Pavan Kumar Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pavan Kumar Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. 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

Similar cases

Sahjad @ Aughad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Nanhkau @ Rajkumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Shameen Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Sabaan vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home Department Civil Secretariat, Lucknow

Ruby vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Sukesh Rajan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P.