Dismissed¶13

Smt Asha and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC5 May 2025A482/35933/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 CrPC quashing application dismissed; charge sheet no. 159/2019 dated 04.08.2019 and cognizance order dated 25.10.2019 upheld; Case Crime No. 248/2018, Sections 452, 323, 504 & 506 IPC, PS Baberu, District Banda; Special Judge SC/ST, Banda; appreciation of evidence is for trial court; inherent powers to be used sparingly at pre-trial stage; disputed questions of fact and defence not examinable pre-trial; relied on R.P. Kapur, Manik B., Bhajan Lal, P.P. Sharma, Zandu Pharmaceutical; applicants Smt Asha and Chanda; counsel Gopal Krishna; decided 5.5.2025.

What did the court decide?

Appreciation of evidence is a function of the trial court; the High Court in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot assume such jurisdiction and put an end to the process of trial provided under the law. ¶10

Smt Asha and Another vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether the charge sheet no. 159/2019 dated 04.08.2019 and the cognizance order dated 25.10.2019 passed by the Special Judge SC/ST, Banda in Case Crime No. 248/2018 are liable to be quashed in exercise of inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. +1 more

¶7

Court's answer

In view of the Apex Court precedents relied upon, no ground for quashing the proceedings of Case No. 549/IX/2019 was made out; the proceedings do not suffer from any illegality or infirmity and no interference was warranted.

¶12

Ratio / Principle

¶10

Key takeaways

The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. at the pre-trial stage should not be used in a routine manner but sparingly, only in appropriate cases where there is a legal bar to the proceedings or where the FIR/charge-sheet allegations, taken at face value and accepted in their entirety, do not disclose commission of any offence.ratio¶11
Disputed questions of fact and the defence of the accused cannot be taken into consideration at the pre-trial stage.ratio¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Deepak Verma, J.) dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of charge sheet no. 159/2019 dated 04.08.2019 and cognizance order dated 25.10.2019 passed by the Special Judge SC/ST, Banda in Case No. 549/IX/2019 (arising from Case Crime No. 248/2018, Sections 452, 323, 504 & 506 IPC, Police Station Baberu, District Banda). Held: appreciation of evidence is a function of the trial court and the High Court cannot assume that jurisdiction to end the trial; the inherent power at the pre-trial stage must be used sparingly, not routinely; and disputed questions of fact and the defence of the accused cannot be considered at that stage. Relying on R.P. Kapur, Manik B., State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, P.P. Sharma and Zandu Pharmaceutical, the Court found no illegality or infirmity in the proceedings and dismissed the application of applicants Smt. Asha and Chanda.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:70777

¶2

Court No. - 84

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 35933 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Smt Asha And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Gopal Krishna Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Gopal Krishna, learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State.

¶7

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the impugned charge sheet no. 159/2019 dated 04.08.2019 as well as cognizance order dated 25.10.2019 passed by the court of Special Judge SC/ST, Banda in Case No. 549/IX/2019 (State Vs. Smt. Asha & others) in Case Crime No. 248/2018, U/s 452, 323, 504 & 506 I.P.C., Police Station Baberu, District- Banda, in the interest of justice.

¶8

Counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case due to mala fide intention. All allegations alleged in the FIR is false and baseless and dispute is civil in nature. Allegation is that applicants entered in the house of informant and assaulted with lathi, danda and Kulhari. On perusal of FIR and material evidence collected during investigation, no offence under the alleged sections is made out.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the submission raised by applicants' counsel and submits that prima facie offence is made out against the applicants. Medical examination report and statement of injured, are supporting the prosecution story. It is not a case of false implication. Charge sheet has been submitted in the year 2019, about five years have been passed, as such, applicant is not entitled for relief as prayed. No interference is warranted.

¶10

The grounds taken in the application reveal that many of them relate to disputed question of fact. This Court is of the view that it is well settled that the appreciation of evidence is a function of the trial court. This Court in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot assume such jurisdiction and put an end to the process of trial provided under the law. It is also settled by the Apex Court in catena of judgments that The impugned criminal proceeding against the applicants is abuse of the process of the

¶11

Court and is liable to be quashed by this Court.the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. at pre-trial stage should not be used in a routine manner but it has to be used sparingly, only in such an appropriate cases, where it manifestly appears that there is a legal bar against the institution or continuance of the criminal proceedings or where allegations made in First Information Report or charge-sheet and the materials relied in support of same, on taking their face value and accepting in their entirety do not disclose the commission of any offence against the accused. The disputed questions of facts and defence of the accused cannot be taken into consideration at this pre-trial stage.

¶12

In view of the above, in the light of judgment of the Apex Court in the matters of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, Manik B. Vs. Kadapala Sreyes Reddy and another, 2023 Live Law (SC) 642, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 , no ground for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case, is made out which may call for any interference by this Court in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as the same do not suffer from any illegality or infirmity.

¶13

The present 482 application of applicants- Smt. Asha and Chanda, is hereby dismissed with the aforesaid observation.

¶14

Order Date :- 5.5.2025 Nitin Verma

¶15

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

Smt Asha and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Asha and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Brij Bhushan Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Chhedi Lal Sahu and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Ajay Kumar Dubey vs State of U.P.

Javed and 3 Others vs State of Up and Another

Avnish Sharma and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Virendra Singh and 3 Others vs State of Upand Another