Disposed

Moharram Ali and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC25 May 2026NA528/2082/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In-laws of the complainant sought quashing of a charge sheet and summoning order in a dowry/cruelty case under BNS and the Dowry Prohibition Act, alleging false implication without specific allegations. The court issued notice to opposite party no. 2, fixed timelines for counter affidavit and rejoinder, and stayed further proceedings against the applicants till the next date.

What did the court decide?

Interim stay of proceedings pursuant to the impugned charge sheet and summoning order against the applicants till next listing; notice issued to opposite party no. 2.

Moharram Ali and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 2082 of 2026

¶3

Moharram Ali And 3 Others

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pawan Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 16

¶8

HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.

¶9

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

¶10

The instant application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of impugned charge sheet dated 02.11.2024 vide Case Crime No.44/2024 Under Section 85, 115(2), 351(2), 351(3), 352 BNS and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Sultanpur and the order of cognizance and summoning order dated 07.04.2024 passed by/ pending in the court of Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.33, Sultanpur in Crl. Case No.412/2026 "State Vs. Moharram Ali".

¶11

Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the applicants are in-laws of the victim and they have falsely been implicated in the instant matter. He next added that there is no specific allegation against the present applicants for committing cruelty or demand of dowry and due to anonymity, the names of the present applicants have been mentioned in the first information report. He next added that the Investigating Officer, without collecting the material evidence against the present applicants, has submitted the chargesheet. In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance on the Judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Geeta Mehrotra Vs State of U.P. and Others, reported in 2012(10) ADJ 464 and Kahkashan Kausar alias Sonam and Others Vs State of Bihar and Others, reported in (2022) 6 SCC

¶12

NA528 No. 2082 of 2026

¶13

¶14

599 and submits that the case of the present applicants is squarely covered with the ratio of Judgment aforesaid. Thus, submission is that the criminal proceedings against the applicants may be quashed.

¶15

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicants are named in the first information report and they are involved in committing offence and thus, submission is that the applicants are not entitled for any relief.

¶16

Matter requires consideration.

¶17

Issue notice to opposite party no. 2, returnable at an early date.

¶18

Steps be taken within one week.

¶19

Three weeks' time is granted to the opposite parties to file counter affidavit.

¶20

One week thereafter is granted to learned counsel for the applicant to file rejoinder affidavit.

¶21

List thereafter.

¶22

Till the next date of listing, the proceedings initiated in pursuance of entire proceedings of impugned charge sheet dated 02.11.2024 vide Case Crime No.44/2024 Under Section 85, 115(2), 351(2), 351(3), 352 BNS and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Sultanpur and the order of cognizance and summoning order dated 07.04.2024 passed by/ pending in the court of Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.33, Sultanpur in Crl. Case No.412/2026 "State Vs. Moharram Ali" shall remain stayed so far as the present applicants are concerned.

¶23

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

¶24

May 25, 2026

¶25

V. Sinha

¶26

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

Moharram Ali and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Moharram Ali and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harikesh @ Harikesh Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. /Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Rajiv Kumar Choubey @ Rajiv Choubey vs State of U.P. through the Principal Secretary/ Additional Chief Secretary, Home

Shailendra Trivedi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Smt. Shanti Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Dinesh and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Moti Lal @ Motilal Sonkar and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others