Dismissed¶¶14

Ambuj Pandey Alias Shankar Pandey v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC2 Jan 2025A482/44481/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

S.482 Cr.P.C. quashing application dismissed; Allahabad High Court; Vinod Diwakar J.; charge sheet 8.11.2023; summoning order 08.04.2024; Case No.620 of 2024; ACJM Jaunpur; Sections 354A 504 506 509-B IPC; Sections 66-D 67 67-A IT Act; Instagram ID WIKI 1597 Surat; victim statements Sections 161/164 Cr.P.C.; Sections 323 354 504 506 34 IPC; Section 3/4 Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act; mala fide; trial court adjudication of facts; Ambuj Pandey alias Shankar Pandey; Harish Chandra; G.A./A.G.A.

What did the court decide?

Prima facie observation from the victim's Section 161/164 Cr.P.C. statements that she made a specific allegation of indecent comments being made over her Instagram ID and of her photos being made viral. ¶¶11

Ambuj Pandey Alias Shankar Pandey Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶¶14

Issue for consideration

Whether the charge sheet dated 8.11.2023 and summoning order dated 08.04.2024 and the underlying criminal proceedings (Sections 354A, 504, 506, 509-B IPC; Sections 66-D, 67, 67-A IT Act) pending as Case No.620 of 2024 should be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant claiming false implication via village politics/enmity and absence of evidence against him.

¶¶7

Court's answer

¶¶11

Ratio / Principle

The ingredients of Sections 323, 354, 504, 506, 34 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act (as printed) are satisfied by those allegations.

¶¶11

Key takeaways

Accordingly, no case for quashing of the impugned proceedings is made out.ratio¶¶11
The submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant call for determination on questions of fact adequately adjudicable only by the trial court; adjudication of questions of facts, appreciation of evidence, and examining reliability/credibility of the version does not fall within the jurisdiction exercisable under Section 482 Cr.P.C.ratio¶¶12
In view of the material on record, the impugned criminal proceedings cannot be held manifestly attended with mala fide or maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Court No. 76), Vinod Diwakar, J., decision dated 3.1.2025: Section 482 Cr.P.C. application by Ambuj Pandey alias Shankar Pandey seeking quashing of charge sheet dated 8.11.2023 and summoning order dated 08.04.2024 (Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Room No.16, Jaunpur; Case No.620 of 2024; Sections 354A, 504, 506, 509-B IPC and Sections 66-D, 67, 67-A IT Act, P.S. Pawara) DISMISSED. Court found from the victim's Sections 161/164 Cr.P.C. statements a specific allegation of indecent comments over her Instagram ID and viral photos; ingredients of Sections 323, 354, 504, 506, 34 IPC and Section 3/4 of the 'Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act' (spelled thus in the judgment) held satisfied; counsel's factual submissions (village politics/enmity, applicant residing in Surat) left to the trial court; proceedings not shown mala fide and no illegality/perversity found in the summoning order.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:1784

¶2

Court No. - 76

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 44481 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ambuj Pandey Alias Shankar Pandey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Harish Chandra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused material on record.

¶7

The instant application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 8.11.2023 and summoning order dated 08.04.2024, passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Room No.16), Jaunpur, in Case No.620 of 2024, under Sections 354A, 504, 506, 509-B IPC and Section 66-D, 67, 67-A IT Act, P.S. Pawara, District Jaunpur, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, (Room No.16), Jaunpur.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the instant case due to village politics and enmity with his father. The entire allegation of snatching the mobile phone of the victim and making her photos viral has been made against co-accused Ajeet. No allegation has been made against the applicant. No evidence of snatching the mobile of the victim and making her photos viral has surfaced during the investigation qua applicant. The applicant resides in Surat and works in a private company and he has no concerned with the victim/complainant. The applicant has been falsely dragged in the instant case merely based on the statement of the

¶9

complainant. However, no evidence is collected in support of the allegations made by the complainant. The investigation of the case has not been conducted properly.

¶10

Per contra , learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that in her statement, recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., the victim/complainant has made clear allegations against the applicant stating that the applicant had made indecent comments on the complainant's Instagram ID. The location of Instagram ID WIKI 1597; was found in Surat, which belongs to the applicant.

¶11

After hearing learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and have gone through the statement of the victim, recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C, its prima facie observed that the victim has made a specific allegation of making indecent comments over her Instagram id and making the photos of victim viral. Thus, the ingredients of Sections 323, 354, 504, 506, 34 IPC and Section 3/4 of Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act are satisfied. Therefore, no case for quashing of impugned proceedings is made out.

¶12

So far as the submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant call for determination on questions of fact which may be adequately adjudicated upon only by the trial court. Adjudication of questions of facts and appreciation of evidence or examining the reliability and credibility of the version does not fall within the arena of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In view of the material on record, it can also not be held that the impugned criminal proceedings are manifestly attended with mala fide and maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking

¶13

vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge. Similarly, no such illegality, perversity or any other substantial error could be pointed out in the impugned summoning order so as to warrant any interference by this court in the exercise of powers u/s 482 Cr.P.C.

¶14

The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is devoid of merit, and it is accordingly dismissed .

¶15

Order Date :- 3.1.2025 A. Tripathi

¶16

Justice Vinod Diwakar

¶17

Digitally signed by :- AKHILESH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ambuj Pandey Alias Shankar Pandey v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ambuj Pandey Alias Shankar Pandey 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