Allahabad High Court
RAJAT AND 3 OTHERSversusState of U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- NAND PRABHA SHUKLA
Holding
The High Court held that the material does not show that no offence is made out and therefore refused to quash the proceedings.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash a summoning order dated 29 February 2022 and a charge‑sheet (No. 19 of 2021) filed under Sections 498A, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in a criminal case (Case No. 33 of 2021) pending before the Civil Judge (J.D.)/F.T.C., Amroha. The High Court examined the material on record and noted that the dispute centered on questions of fact, not on the existence of an offence. The Court held that, at this stage, it could not be said that no offence was made out against the applicants and that the alleged abuse of process was not established. Consequently, the Court declined the prayer to quash the proceedings. It directed that if the applicants are not on bail they may apply for bail within 45 days, and that any application for discharge should be decided by the trial court within two weeks, with no coercive measures taken during that period. The application was therefore disposed of without quashing the charge‑sheet.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash the criminal proceedings against the applicants
- Whether the material on record demonstrates that no offence is made out against the applicants
- Whether there is an abuse of process or failure of justice warranting dismissal of the charge‑sheet
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 498A, 506
Subjects
- Section 482
- Criminal Procedure Code
- quash of criminal proceedings
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- IPC 498A
- IPC 506
- abuse of process
- bail
- discharge application
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 21300 of 2024
Rajat And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sushil Dubey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Sandeep Kumar Srivastava
Court No. - 78
HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.
1. Heard Mr. Sushil Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Sandeep
Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2, learned
A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed with a
prayer to quash the summoning order dated 29.02.2022 passed by learned
Civil Judge (J.D.)/F.T.C.,IInd and charge-sheet No. 19 of 2021 dated
13.12.2021 under Sections 498A, 506 IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act
as well as entire proceeding of Case No. 33 of 2021 (State v. Rajat and
Others) under Sections 498A, 506 IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act,
Police Station-Mahila Thana, District-Amroha pending in the Court of
learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/F.T.C., IInd Amroha.
3. 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. Only in
cases where the Court finds that there has been failure of justice or abuse of
procedure, this power may be exercised to prevent the abuse of process to
secure the ends of justice.
4. Accordingly, prayer for quashing is declined.
5. In case, the applicants are not on bail, it is directed that if the applicants
appear or surrender through counsel before the Trial Court and makes an
A482 No. 21300 of 2024
2
application for bail within 45 days from the date of the order, the same shall
be considered and disposed of expeditiously, after giving opportunity to the
other side.
6. However, in the interest of justice, it is further provided that in case the
applicants move an application for discharge at an appropriate stage through
counsel within 45 days, the same shall be disposed of by the Trial Court by a
reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within two weeks
thereafter.
7. For a period of 45 days or till the disposal of the discharge application,
whichever is earlier, no coercive measures shall be taken against the
applicants in the aforesaid case.
8. With the aforesaid direction, this application is disposed of.
(Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)
May 7, 2026
Aditya Tripathi
Digitally signed by :-
ADITYA TRIPATHI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…