Application No. 13512 of 2017. Case: Vibhor Sharma and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another. High Court of Allahabad (India)
| Case Number | Application No. 13512 of 2017 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Pramod Narayan Shahi, Adv. |
| Judges | Rajesh Dayal Khare, J. |
| Issue | Criminal Procedure Code - Section 482; Indian Penal Code - Sections 498A, 406 |
| Judgement Date | May 11, 2017 |
| Court | High Court of Allahabad (India) |
Judgment:
Rajesh Dayal Khare, J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge sheet No.121 of 2016 in case crime No. 242 of 2016 under Sections 498A, 406 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, police station Mahila Thana district Agra pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-X Agra.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that applicant No. 1 is husband, applicant No.2 is father-in-law, applicant No.3 is mother-in-law and the applicant No.4 is sister-in-law of the opposite party No.2 who have been falsely implicated in the present case by the opposite party No.2 on general allegations as has been stated in paragraph-4 of the supplementary affidavit filed today in Court which is being taken on record. It has been argued that criminal prosecution of the applicants is in clear contravention of the settled principle of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in (2012) 10 Supreme Court Cases 741 in the matter of Geeta Mehrotra and another versus State of Uttar Pradesh.
So far as the applicant No. 1 (husband) namely Vibhor Sharma is concerned following order is being passed:-
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 applicant. All the submission made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of power conferred 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 in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, 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. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicant has got a right of discharge under Section 239 or 227/228 or 245 Cr.P.C. as the case may be through a proper application for the...
To continue reading
Request your trial