Ram Das and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Court No. - 11

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4792 of 2025

Applicant :- Ram Das And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. And Anothe r Counsel for Applicant :- Suresh Kumar Tiwari,Dharmendra Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, the learned A.G.A for State and perused the record.

¶6

The present application under Section 482 CrPC/528 BNSS has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Case No.334 of 2025 (State Vs. Ram Das & Others), arising out of Case Crime No.96 of 2023, under Sections 376, 323, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C., police station Atrauli, district Hardoi pending before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Hardoi.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants informed the Court that earlier one application under Section 482 CrPC was also filed with the same prayer but the same was withdrawn with liberty to file fresh application, therefore the present application is filed.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that husband of the complainant of the case in question along with others came on the spot on 28.02.2023 in the morning and caused injuries to applicant no.1 and immediately the complainant (applicant no.3 herein) went to the police station and lodged first information report no.94 of 2023, under Section 506, 504 and 323 IPC, police station Atrauli, district Hardoi on the same date at 11.01 hours against the husband of the complainant, namely, Vinod and Teerath, Ramesh, Sarwan and two persons. He further submitted that only with the intention of making pressure on the applicants on the basis of concocted facts, first information report no.96 of 2023, under Section 452, 354, 323, 504, 506, 34 IPC, police station Atrauli, district Hardoi was lodged on 28.02.2023 at 19.14 hours showing the date of incident on 26.02.2023 midnight. He further submitted that in the first information report of case in question it is mentioned that on 26.02.2023, the brother of the complainant namely, Ramdas entered into the house of complainant at about 3.00 PM, gave life threat and also molested her and on the alarm being raised by her, husband of the complainant came there and Ramdas was caught by her husband then he pushed her husband and ran away from the spot. It is further submitted that on the next date, instead of going to the police station, she went to her parental home at Begamganj, Sandila. It is further alleged in the first information report of the case in question that on the next date at 8.00 AM morning,

¶9

Ramdas along with others came back and beaten her with kicks and fists, lathi and danda and in the said incident her husband Vinod as well as other family members were also beaten by them.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the prosecution case is based on concocted facts only with the intention to make pressure on the applicants to compromise in first information report no.94 of 2023 lodged from the side of the applicants. He also submitted that except the complainant, namely, Smt. Laxmi Devi, no one was medically examined. There is two medico legal reports of the victim/complainant are available, one was conducted at CNC Bharawan, Hardoi in which all the injuries were found simple in nature and another was conducted at District Women Hospital, Hardoi. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that in the medico legal report of District Women Hospital, Hardoi no such injuries were found those are shown in the first medical legal examination report. There is contradiction in the medical legal reports relied upon by the Investigating Officer. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that police authorities also acted in illegal manner and took action against the applicants. The charge-sheet was submitted against the applicants even without considering the evidences provided by the applicants. Learned counsel for the applicants relying upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal reported in 1992 SCC (Crl.) 426 submits that the prosecution in question is malicious and the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is therefore, submitted by the learned counsel for applicants that the present proceedings is liable to be quashed.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer made by the applicants and submitted that several evidences are found against the applicants and thereafter charge-sheet was submitted against them, but he does not dispute the fact that prior to the lodging of the first information report in question, one first information report was also lodged i.e. first information report no.94 of 2023 from the side of the applicants against the husband of the complainant of present case in question and others.

¶12

Considering the submissions urged by the learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the FIR as also the FIR lodged from the side of the applicants prior to the lodging of the FIR in question, this Court is of the view that the matter requires consideration.

¶13

Issue notice to the opposite party no.2.

¶14

List this case in the second week of August, 2025.

¶15

Till the next date of listing, no coercive steps shall be

¶16

taken against the applicants in Case No.334 of 2025 (State Vs. Ram Das & Others), arising out of Case Crime No.96 of 2023, under Sections 376, 323, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C., police station Atrauli, district Hardoi pending before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Hardoi.

¶17

Order Date :- 9.6.2025. Rks.

¶18

Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ram Das and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Das and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Naresh Chandra vs Sri Bhanu Chandra Goswami Consolidation Commissioner Lko.

Shipra Chaudhary and 12 Others vs Sri Parth Sarthi Sen Sharma Addl. Chief Secy. Medical and Health Lko. and Anothe

Sandeep Kannaujia @ Sandeep Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Vishal Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Mahendra Kumar @ Mahendra Jaiswal and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lal Bahadur Shastri Bhawan Lko. and 2 Others

Mahek Vimal Thru. Her Husband Satyam Verma @ Siddharth Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Lko. and 5 Others