Dismissed¶12

Ajeet and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC15 Jul 2025A482/39091/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing application dismissed; cognizance order dated 21.08.2024 upheld; Case No. 5869 of 2024 (State versus Ajeet and Others); Case Crime No. 73 of 2024; Sections 504 and 506 I.P.C.; P.S. Badalpur, Gautam Buddh Nagar; Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I; allegation of cursory and routine cognizance; no illegality or infirmity; no interference warranted at this stage; High Court of Judicature at Allahabad; Deepak Verma, J.; decided 16.7.2025.

What did the court decide?

The impugned cognizance order dated 21.08.2024 does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity and no interference is warranted at this stage. ¶11

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:114705

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39091 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ajeet And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Kumar Mishra,Shashi Kant Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the impugned cognizance order dated 21.08.2024 passed in Case No. 5869 of 2024 (State versus Ajeet and Others) arising out of Case Crime No. 73 of 2024 registered under Sections 504 and 506 I.P.C. P.S. Badalpur, Gautam Buddh Nagar pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I.

¶8

Counsel for the applicants submits that before taking cognizance, the learned Magistrate has neither taken into consideration the nature of accusations nor he has made any any effort to satisfy himself as from the materials collected during investigation and keeping in view the nature of the allegations made against the applicants any offence under Sections 504 & 506 I.P.C. disclosed or not. By the impugned order he has taken cognizance in a very cursory and routine manner

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as informant's counsel opposed the submission made by applicants' counsel and submits that the order is just and proper and only to linger on the proceedings, the applicant has moved the application. The

¶10

submission of applicants' counsel is manipulated, false and without any support of evidence.

¶11

Considering the argument raised by counsel for the parties and perused the entire record, it is evident that the impugned cognizance order dated 21.08.2024 do not suffer from any illegality or infirmity and no interference is warranted, at this stage.

¶12

The present 482 application is hereby dismissed.

¶13

Order Date :- 16.7.2025 SY

¶14

Digitally signed by :- SWETA YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ajeet and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajeet and 3 Others 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases