Dheeraj Thapar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Dheeraj Thapar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the charge-sheet dated 02.07.2023 and the cognizance order dated 04.08.2023 in Case no. 122516 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime no. 101 of 2021 under Section 67A of I.T. Act (PS- Mahila Thana, District Kanpur Nagar), together with the entire ensuing proceeding against the applicants, should be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Court's answer

Prima facie it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants; their assertions of false implication are factual issues requiring proper adjudication by the trial court on evidence and cannot be conclusively determined in a Section 482 Cr.P.C proceeding, in which the Court is not inclined to hold a minitrial.

Ratio / Principle

The inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C are to be exercised sparingly and with caution; in the instant case no sufficient ground has been made out to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of the Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Key takeaways

The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Saurabh Srivastava, J.) | Application U/S 482 No. 32014 of 2024 | Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:122599 | Decided 24.7.2025. Dheeraj Thapar and 3 others applied to quash the charge-sheet dated 02.07.2023 and cognizance order dated 04.08.2023 passed by Civil Judge (J.D.) Fast Track Court (CAW) in Case no. 122516 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime no. 101 of 2021 under Section 67A of I.T. Act, PS- Mahila Thana, District Kanpur Nagar, proceedings pending before A.C.J (J.D.) 07, Kanpur Nagar. Counsel argued the allegations were the result of instigation by the wife of applicant no. 1, that no independent witness supported the incident, and that the prosecution was malicious. Held: prima facie it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants; assertions of false implication are factual issues requiring adjudication by the trial court on evidence and cannot be conclusively determined in a Section 482 Cr.P.C proceeding, in which the Court declines to hold a minitrial; inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C are to be exercised sparingly and with caution, and no sufficient ground was made out to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction. Application dismissed as devoid of merits.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:122599

Court No. - 77

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 32014 of 2024

Applicant :- Dheeraj Thapar And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Padmaker Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Present application has been preferred with prayer to quash the charge-sheet dated 02.07.2023 as well as cognizance order dated 04.08.2023 passed by Civil Judge (J.D.) Fast Track Court (CAW) in Case no. 122516 of 2023 (State of U.P. vs. Dheeraj Thapar and others) arising out of Case Crime no. 101 of 2021 under Section 67A of I.T. Act, PS- Mahila Thana, District Kanpur Nagar pending in court of A.C.J (J.D.) 07, Kanpur Nagar.

While assailing entire proceeding in shape of charge sheet and cognizance order, it is contended by learned counsel for applicants that whatever allegation has been levelled by the complainant against the applicants are merely result of instigation of wife of applicant no. 1. There is no independent witness who has supported the incident. Prosecution of applicants is wholly malicious. Applicants have no motive to commit alleged offence, hence the entire proceeding is liable to be set aside.

Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through instant application.

After hearing the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, it is observed that prima facie it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. The assertions of false implication raised by the applicants are factual issues that requires proper adjudication by the trial court based on evidence and cannot be conclusively determined in proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In proceeding u/s 482 Cr.P.C, this Court is not inclined to hold minitrial.

It is well settled that the inherent powers under Section 482

Cr.P.C are to be exercised sparingly and with caution, primarily to prevent abuse of the process of the court or to secure the ends of justice. In the instant case, no sufficient ground have been made out to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

In view of the foregoing, the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed .

Order Date :- 24.7.2025 Shaswat

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