Wednesday, 22, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Shishu Pal And Others vs State Of U.P. And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 2792 ALL

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 2792 ALL
Judgement Date : 1 February, 2024

Allahabad High Court

Shishu Pal And Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 1 February, 2024





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:16933
 
Court No. - 92
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 381 of 2024
 

 
Applicant :- Shishu Pal And Others
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Kumar Dhananjay
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.
 

1. Heard Sri Kumar Dhananjay, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri S.K. Chandraul, learned A.G.A. for the State-O.P. no.1 and perused the record.

2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants praying for quashing cognizance/summoning order dated 9.10.2018 and the entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No.26505 of 2018 (State of U.P. vs. Shishupal and others), arising out of Case Crime No.319 of 2017, under Sections 3/4/5/6 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, Police Station-Kavi Nagar, District-Ghaziabad pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad.

3. In the instant matter, O.P. no.2 had lodged an FIR on 2.3.2017 against the applicants alleging therein that he was introduced to A.D.S. Company and it was informed to him that the said company was doing advertising work. The membership was to be taken after paying Rs.55,200/- and its members had to click on advertising and for each click, some amount was given to the members. O.P. No.2 was getting paid for some time but after month of February 2017, the informant/O.P. no.2 was not paid any amount. There was dues of Rs.10,00,000/- on the company of O.P. no.2 and his relatives.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that there was some money disputed between the parties but the applicants had never committed any offence as alleged against them. Further submission is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the court below has utterly failed to consider that prima facie no case is made out against the applicants. He also pointed out certain documents in support of his contention.

5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the application and contends that the impugned order has been challenged almost after six years and as disputed questions of fact are involved in the matter, it cannot be adjudicated by this Court while exercising powers conferred under Section 482 Cr.P.C.C. The Court below has rightly summoned the applicants and no interference is required by this Court in the impugned order as well as the on going proceedings.

6. 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 applicants. 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. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court.

7. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 has laid down the guidelines under which circumstances the Court should, in its inherent power, entertain an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The guidelines are as follows:-

"(i) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.

(ii) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.

(iii) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.

(iv) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code.

(v) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.

(vi) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the Act concerned (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the Act concerned, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.

(vii) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fides and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge."

8. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918, R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192, and lastly, Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 has held that only those cases in which no prima facie case is made out can be considered in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

9. The instant application does not fall under the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgments mentioned above, and followed in a number of matters. Moreover, the facts as alleged cannot be said that, prima facie, no offence is made out against the applicant(s). It is only after the evidence and trial, it can be seen as to whether the offence, as alleged, has been committed or not.

10. Hence, the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be entertained and is, accordingly, dismissed.

Order Date :- 1.2.2024

Manish Himwan

 

 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IDRC

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter