Dismissed

Dharmendra and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC13 Feb 2025A482/3586/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court dismissed an application under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of criminal proceedings. The court held that factual issues could not be examined at this stage before the trial commenced, citing Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of proceedings dismissed. No order on bail request made herein.

Dharmendra and Another vs State of U.P. and Another — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:21115

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3586 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Dharmendra And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kartikey Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Kartikey Singh, learned counsel for the applicants as well as Sri Rajiv Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State-opposite party.

¶7

This is an application under Section 482 has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Crl. Case No. 35683/2024 (State Vs. Dharmendra and another) under Section 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. Police Station- Refinery, District- Mathura at present pending in the Court of Ld. Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Mathura including Charge heet dated 28.11.2023 and cognizance order dated 10.4.2024 and other process issued against the applicants arising out of Case Crime No.317 of 2023, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. Police Station- Refinery, DistrictMathura.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant happens to be a Gram Pradhan who was not present at the place of incident which has been alleged to be in the first information report dated 14.10.2023. He further submits that the entire allegations are false and fictitious besides being an attempt to somewhat attribute criminality.

¶9

Learned AGA, on the other hand, submits that the entire issues sought to be raised upon by the learned counsel for the applicants centers around factual issues which cannot be gone into the present proceedings.

¶10

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the record, this Court is of the opinion that factual issues cannot be gone into the proceedings under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. particularly, when the trial has not commenced, in the background of the dictum in the case of Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra and others, AIR 2021 SC 1918 .

¶11

In view of the same, this Court declines to interfere in the present proceedings.

¶12

The application is accordingly, dismissed. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicants submits that a direction be issued for consideration of the bail.

¶13

This Court has no reason to disbelieve that in case, applicant moves appropriate proceedings before the court below for enlargement of bail, then the same may be decided with most expedition in accordance with law of the land.

¶14

Order Date :- 13.2.2025 Rajesh

¶15

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

Dharmendra and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharmendra and Another 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pushpa vs State of U.P. and Another

Tetri Devi and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Nandlal and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Lal Pratap vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Anuj Kumar Gupta and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Natthu Bakhsh and Another vs State of U.P. and Another