Disposed

Roopnarayan Sharma and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Jul 2024CRLA/2072/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal appeal filed seeking quashing of a summoning order. The High Court declined to quash the order but directed the trial court to expedite and finalize the complaint proceedings within 12 months and stayed coercive action until disposal.

What did the court decide?

Direction to expeditiously finalize complaint proceedings within 12 months; stay on coercive action.

Roopnarayan Sharma and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:115663

¶2

Court No. - 83

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2072 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Roopnarayan Sharma And 5 Others Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Monu Mishra,Rahul Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Brajendra Kumar,G.A.,Naresh Kumar Pal

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Rahul Singh, learned counsel for appellants and Sri Naresh Kumar Pal, learned counsel for respondent no.2 as well as learned AGA.

¶7

The instant appeal has been filed for seeking quashing of the order dated 20.04.2023 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Court No.2, Etawh in Complaint Case No.243 of 2017, (Smt. Sheela Devi Vs. Roop Narayan and others), under Section 406, 147, 307, 394, 120B IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Usarahar, District Etawah.

¶8

Learned counsel for appellants submitted that an FIR was lodged by the respondent no.2 against the appellants wherein final report was submitted by the concerned Investigating Officer. Being aggrieved with the same, respondent no.2 preferred protest petition which was treated as complaint and vide impugned order dated 20.04.2023, appellants were summoned. Learned counsel for appellants further submitted that there is a civil dispute pending between the husband of respondent no.2 and appellants and only to make pressure upon the appellants, respondent no.2 filed the present case against the appellants wherein appellants were summoned by the impugned order. Learned counsel for appellants further submitted that before filing the present case, in the year 2013, respondent no.2 filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. against the appellants which was also treated as complaint case, wherein till date, no summoning order has been passed and as such, appellants have been falsely implicated having no criminal history to their credits.

¶9

Per contra, learned counsel for respondent no.2 as well as learned AGA opposed the prayer as made in the appeal on the ground that summoning order has been passed after considering

¶10

the material available on record but did not dispute the fact that civil dispute is persisting between the parties.

¶11

Be that as it may, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the matter pending by way of calling counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit by the parties and as such, learned court concerned is hereby directed to expedite and finalize the proceedings of Complaint Case No.243 of 2017, (Smt. Sheela Devi Vs. Roop Narayan and others), under Section 406, 147, 307, 394, 120B IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Usarahar, District Etawah, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 12 months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order before him without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

¶12

Learned counsel for appellants assures on behalf of the appellants that they will fully cooperate with the learned trial court concerned for expeditious disposal of the said complaint case.

¶13

However, it is made clear that till the disposal of the proceedings of the aforementioned complaint case, no coercive action shall be taken up against the appellants herein.

¶14

The instant appeal stands disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 19.7.2024 Vivek Kr.

¶16

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

Roopnarayan Sharma and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Roopnarayan Sharma and 5 Others v. State of U.P. 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

Chandrababu and 2 Others vs State of Up Others

Mahkar Singh vs State of Up and Another

Geeta Devi and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Jagdeesh Sharma vs State of U.P. and Another

Ranjeet Singh vs State of Up and Another

Narendra Singh and 2 Others vs State of Up and Another