Budhiram Alias Budhai v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC20 Jun 2025A482/5186/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 482 to quash a sessions trial and chargesheet for offences under Sections 354 and 376 IPC on grounds of political rivalry and compromise between parties. The court noted discrepancies in the victim's statements and found the matter requires consideration.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings stayed until further order; case listed in September, 2025.

Budhiram Alias Budhai vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Court No. - 11

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5186 of 2025

¶3

Applicant :- Budhiram Alias Budhai Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home, Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Shankar Mishra,Abhinav Mishra,Abhishek Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶5

Vakalatnama filed by Pushpanjali, on behalf of respondent nos.2 and 3 is taken on record. Office is directed to show his/her name as the counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3 in the cause list.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3.

¶7

The instant application has been filed by the applicant praying as under:-

¶8

"To quash the entire proceedings of the Session Trial No. 61/2025 (State of U.P. versus Budhiram alias Budhai) pending before Additional Sessions Judge FTC Court No. 1 Bahraich as well as Chargesheet dated: 02/09/2024 in Case No. 19188/2024 arising out from Case Crime No. 67/2024 Under section 354, 376 IPC Police Station Jarwal Road District Bahraich during pendency of aforesaid petition before this Hon'ble Court in the interest of justice."

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was implicated in the present case due to political rivalry. It is further submitted that as per the prosecution case mentioned in the F.I.R., attempt to molest the victim is alleged. Thereafter, the victim's statement was recorded u/s 161 C.P.C., in which, she again reiterated that the applicant tried to outrage her modesty. A specific question was asked by the Investigating officer from the victim that whether any wrong was done with her by the applicant or not, in response to which, she denied for the same. It is next submitted that further, the victim's statement was recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C., in which, she developed a case of fingering done by the applicant in her genital part. The chargesheet has been submitted by the Investigating Officer, but no offense under Section 376 I.P.C. is made out. It is next submitted that the prosecution in question has arisen due to political rivalry and the issue has already been resolved between the parties by way of compromise and now, the complainant and the victim do not want to pursue the case in

¶10

question, hence, the proceedings may be quashed.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already submitted, hence, the proceedings cannot be quashed.

¶12

Learned counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3 submits that the issue has already been resolved between the parties and now, respondent nos.2 and 3 do not want to pursue the case and they do not have any objection, in case, the proceedings are quashed.

¶13

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the application, F.I.R., statements of the victim as well as other relevant material, it is evident that neither in the F.I.R. nor in the victim's statement recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C., material in relation to act of rape is found. But, in the victim's statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C., she has developed a case of fingering done by the applicant in her genital part. In such circumstances, the matter requires consideration.

¶14

8. List this case in the month of September, 2025.

¶15

Until further order, the impugned proceedings shall remain stayed.

¶16

Order Date :- 20.6.2025 Arpan

¶17

Digitally signed by :- ARPAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Budhiram Alias Budhai v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Budhiram Alias Budhai v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shiv Kumar and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Jitendra Kumar Alias Jitendra Kumar Gupta Alias Jatin vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Narayan Datt Tiwari vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Akhilesh Mishra @ Monu Mishra and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Karm Veer Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another

Babban @ Parvesh Shukla Vs State of U.P. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.