Disposed¶12

Siddharth Garg and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC29 Apr 2025A482/3091/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 CrPC quashing application against Domestic Violence Act Section 12 proceedings at notice stage; applicants Siddharth Garg and family (husband, mother-in-law, father-in-law, nanad); wife/complainant Prerna Goyal; Criminal Case No. 35658 of 2024, Court No. 8, Mathura; State relied on Smt. Suman Mishra v. State of U.P. (Application U/S 482 No. 6975 of 2013, decided 31.07.2024) - mere issuance of notice does not sustain 482 petition; no order under Chapter IV of the Act yet passed; application disposed of with liberty to applicants to appear before trial court and contest; maintainability left open.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to the applicants to appear before the court below and raise all legal and factual contentions; application disposed of without quashing the proceedings. ¶12

Siddharth Garg and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty granted to the applicants to appear before the court below and raise all legal and factual contentions; application disposed of without quashing the proceedings.

¶12

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 35658 of 2024 under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Mathura, could be quashed under Section 482 CrPC at the stage where only notices had been issued and no order under Chapter IV of the Act had been passed.

¶8

Court's answer

The Section 482 application stands disposed of, granting the applicants liberty to appear before the court below and take all legal and factual contentions, the Court recording that it has no reason to disbelieve the same shall be decided strictly in accordance with law; the Court did not quash the proceedings nor adjudicate maintainability.

¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Vikas Budhwar, J.) - Application under S. 482 CrPC (No. 3091 of 2025) by Siddharth Garg and three others, described as the husband, mother-in-law, father-in-law and nanad of opposite party no. 2, seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 35658 of 2024 (Smt. Prerna Goyal Vs. Siddharth Garg) under S. 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, pending before the Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 8, Mathura. Learned A.G.A. submitted that no order under Chapter IV of the Act had been passed, that it was open to the applicants to contest the matter, and relied on Smt. Suman Mishra v. State of U.P. (Application U/S 482 No. 6975 of 2013, decided 31.07.2024) for the proposition that mere issuance of notice does not make a S. 482 petition maintainable. The Court disposed of the application, granting the applicants liberty to appear before the court below and take all legal and factual contentions, expressing no reason to disbelieve that the same shall be decided strictly in accordance with law; maintainability was not adjudicated.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:65980

¶2

Court No. - 73

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3091 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Siddharth Garg And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kundan Kumar,Shivendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Kundan Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Vikas Sharma, learned State Law Officer for the State.

¶7

This is an application under Section 482 CrPC preferred by the applicants for quashing the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 35658 of 2024 (Smt. Prerna Goyal Vs. Siddharth Garg) pending before Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Court No.8, District- Mathura, under Section 12 of Domestic Violence Act, Police Station Kotwali (Govind Nagar), District- Mathura.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant no.1 is the husband, applicant no.2 is mother-in-law, applicant no.3 is father-in-law and applicant no.4 is Nanad of O.P. No.2. Submission is that though proceeding under Section 12 of D.V. Act has been initiated by the wife, however, he submits that simultaneously, report of the DPO was called and notices have been issued. He further submits that there is nothing on record to substantiate that the proceedings under D.V. Act are maintainable against the applicant.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that till date no order under Chapter IV of the Act has been passed, thus it is open for the applicant to contest the same and in case, such order is passed there is remedy provided in the Act itself. He also seeks to rely upon the judgment in the case of Smt. Suman Mishra v. State of U.P. in Application U/S 482 No. 6975 of 2013 decided on 31.07.2024 that merely on issuance of notice the proceedings under Section 482 CrPC would not be maintainable.

¶10

At this juncture, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants shall be putting their appearance before the court

¶11

below on raising all the contentions legal and factual and direction be issued to the court below to consider the same in correct perspective.

¶12

Having heard the submissions so made across the Bar as well as the stand taken by learned counsel for the applicants, application stands disposed of granting liberty to the applicant to appear before the court below while taking all legal and factual aspects and this Court has no reason to disbelieve that the same shall be decided strictly in accordance with law.

¶13

Order Date :- 29.4.2025 N.S.Rathour

¶14

(Vikas Budhwar, J)

¶15

Digitally signed by :- NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Siddharth Garg and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Siddharth Garg and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mukesh Sharma and 5 Others vs Sri Parth Sarthi Sen Sharma Prin. Secy. Medical Health and Familywelfare Lko. and 7 Others

Mohdusman vs State of U.P. and Another

Aftab Alam vs State of U.P. and Another

Vikki Sharma vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohammad Faooq vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohammad Farooq vs State of U.P. and Another