Allahabad High Court
Satendra And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 2 August, 2023
Bench: Anish Kumar Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:155546
Court No. - 92
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7487 of 2023
Applicant :- Satendra And 3 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Saurabh Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rakesh Kumar Srivastava
Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.
1. Heard Sri Saurabh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Rakesh Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Sri Prem Prakash, learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was filed seeking quashing of the entire criminal proceedings of Case No. 6090 of 2021, arising out of Case Crime No. 145 of 2021 u/S 498-A, 323, 354, 406, 504, 506, I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S.- Mahila Thana, District- Ghaziabad (State vs. Satendra and others) and also quashing summoning/cognizance order dated 24.05.2022.
3. Vide orde dated 28.02.2023 passed by this Court, since it was a matrimonial dispute, the matter was referred to Mediation Centre of this Court for Mediation. However, learned counsel for the applicants report that the Mediation between the parties has failed.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the complainants/F.I.R. which has been lodged by the opposite party no.2 is based on false and fabricated facts of the case and various other cases with regard to the matrimonial discord are pending against each other.
5. In view of the same, learned counsel for the applicants prays for quashing of the said criminal proceedings.
6. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2. submits that there are specific allegations against all the applicants in the complaint, specific and categorical allegations are made against each of the applicants and the chargesheet has already been filed and the learned Magistrate has already been taking cognizance under the relevant provisions and there is no infirmity in the order taking cognizance.
7. Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 prays for dismissal of instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
8. Learned counsel for the State relied upon judgment in Veena Mittal vs. State of U.P. & Ors: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 110 : 2022 (1) RCR (Criminal) 818, submits that at the time of hearing of the Application under 482 Cr.P.C., the Court is required to look into the contents of the F.I.R. and the chargehsheet available on record and if from the perusal of the F.I.R. and the chargehseet no offence is made out, then only the jurisdiction u/S 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing for the said F.I.R. of chargesheet should be exercised.
9. Having considered the rivals submissions made by learned counsels for the parties, this Court has carefully perused the record of the case.
10. From the perusal of the F.I.R as well as the chargesheet and summoning order, it can't be said that no offence whatsoever is made out against the applicants herein. Therefore, in the light of the judgment in State of Haryana & Ors. vs. Bhajan Lal : 1992 SCC (Cri) 426 and Veena Mittal (supra), this Court do not find any good ground for quashing the proceedings. As prayed by learned counsel for the applicants hence an Application u/S 482 is hereby dismissed.
Order Date :- 2.8.2023
Shubham Arya
