Allahabad High Court
Upendra Kumar Chowdhary And 2 ... vs State Of U.P. And Another on 15 June, 2021
Bench: Rajiv Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 75
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9290 of 2021
Applicant :- Upendra Kumar Chowdhary And 2 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Manu Sharma,Dinesh Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants for quashing of the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 630 of 2018, under section 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and section 4 of D.P.Act, District Kushinagar pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Padrauna, District Kushinagar.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicants are wholly innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive.
Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the O.P. No.2 is the wife of applicant no.1 and false allegation of additional demand of dowry and torture for non-fulfilment of additional demand of dowry has been made against them and have been dragged in the criminal case, as such, the entire proceeding be quashed.
Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present application has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He has also pointed out certain documents in support of his contention.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has submitted that the allegation of making additional demand of dowry has been made against the applicants and an attempt has also been made to set her on fire by pouring kerosene oil.
From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
At this stage, disputed question of fact cannot be considered, therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283, the prayer for quashing the entire proceding is refused.
However, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within thirty days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of settled law laid down by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC).
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 15.6.2021
R
