Vijendra Yadav And Anr. vs The State Of U.P Thru Secy., Home ...
2014 Latest Caselaw 2805 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 26
 

 
Case :- U/S 482/378/407 No. - 2992 of 2014
 

 
Applicant :- Vijendra Yadav And Anr.
 
Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P Thru Secy., Home Lucknow And Anr.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Singh Chauha
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Ajai Lamba,J.

1.Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contends that proceedings in connection with Criminal Case No.469 of 2014, State v. Vijendra Yadav and other, in Case Crime No.1124 of 2013, under Sections 504/506 I.P.C. read with Section 3(1)(x) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Police Station Purwa, District Unnao, are liable to be quashed, inter alia, on the ground that the proceedings have been initiated, because the petitioners are pursuing the case on behalf of Vivek.

2.It has been pointed out that allegedly an incident took place, wherein Archna, daughter of respondent no.2/complainant committed suicide.  Lavlesh, brother of Archana lodged a report alleging that Archna had been talking to Vivek Yadavon mobile phone, brother of the petitioners.  Something transpired, whereupon Archana committed suicide.

3.It has been pleaded that investigation in the said case is going on.  Petitioner no.1, who happens to be Village Pradhan, made representations to various authorities that Vivek has been falsely implicated in the case/F.I.R. lodged on 4th of September, 2013 under Section 306 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Police Station Purwa, District Unnao (Annexure-1).  Because the petitioners started pursuing the litigation on behalf of their brother, impugned proceedings were initiated on 2nd of September, 2013.  Only ocular evidence is available in the said case.  The proceedings have been initiated only so as to discourage the petitioners from pursuing the case on behalf of Vivek.

4.Learned counsel has further pointed out that malice on the part of the investigating agency is evident from the fact that chargesheet had already been filed and bailable warrants have already been procured against the petitioners.

5.Issue notice to respondent no.2 through Chief Judicial Magistrate, Unnao, returnable on 18.8.2014.

6.List on 18.8.2014.

7.In the meantime, in case the petitioners appear before the concerned court within three weeks from today and apply for bail, their application for bail shall be disposed of within one working week.

8.For the said period of three weeks, no coercive measure shall be taken to arrest the petitioners.

Order Date :- 10.7.2014

A.Nigam