Allahabad High Court
Sharda Devi vs State Of U.P. And Another on 4 January, 2023
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28285 of 2022
Applicant :- Sharda Devi
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, 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 applicant to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 41689 of 2019, pending in the Court of CJM and the summoning order dated 29.08.2018 and also the order dated 30.6.2022 initiating coercive steps in the light of fresh available grounds arising out of Case Crime No. 65 of 2017, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 302 IPC and Section 3/4 of D. P. Act, P.S. Lavedi, District Etawah.
The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with malafide intentions for the purposes of harassment.
It is further submitted that applicant is wholly innocent and has not committed any offence, whatsoever, therefore, the prosecution of the applicant on the basis of the police investigation after the judgement and conviction in co-accused's case, is not only illegal but is also a clear abuse of the process of the law.It is further submitted that in the trial of the husband, trial court court after recording the testimony of the witnesses of fact that is P.W.-1, P.W.-2 and P.W.-3 and P.W.-4, the trial court has observed that the deceased was not harassed for demand of dowry and the applicant and her both the daughters had no role to play in the present case.
On the other hand learned AGA has contended that from the perusal of 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 applicant. All the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicant has got a right of discharge before the court below and she is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the trial court.
During arguments, learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that he does not want to press the prayer for quashing of the above mentioned case. His sole prayer is that a direction may be issued to the court below to decide the bail application of the applicant in view of the judgment in the case Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2021 SCC Online SC 922.
In the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court laid down the guidelines for deciding of the bail application. For that purpose, the cases have been divided under four categories. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that the trial courts and the High Courts will keep in mind the aforesaid guidelines, while considering the bail application. This Court has no doubt, that as and when, the applicants approach the trial court for bail, same shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously by the court below in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (supra).
As such application has no force and is accordingly disposed of.
Order Date :- 4.1.2023
RavindraKSingh
