Allahabad High Court Dismisses Application To Quash Prima Facie Allegations of Criminal Intimidation and Outraging Modesty

Must Read

[WhatsApp Privacy Policy Row] It’s a Private App, Don’t Use It; Says Delhi High Court

On Monday, while hearing a petition regarding the privacy policy of WhatsApp, the Delhi High Court said, “It is a private app. Don't join it. It is a voluntary thing, don't accept it. Use some other app.”

Madras High Court Asks the State To Reconsider Number of Seats Allotted for Bcm Category

Mr. Shakkiya filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution to issue a Writ of Mandamus....

Gujarat High Court Directs To Register Name of Petitioners in the Society Records as Owners of Property, as per Will

A single-judge bench of Gujarat High Court consisting of Honourable Justice Biren Vaishnav, because probate wasn’t necessary and that...

If No Complaint Is Filed, No Further Orders Are Required To Be Passed: Telangana High Court

Excerpt In Matlakunta Sundaramma vs The State Of Telangana, on January 8, 2021, the Telangana High Court decided that there...

Gujarat High Court Allows Report Filed by Official Liquidator for Dissolution of the Company

The present report had been filed by the Official Liquidator for the dissolution of M/s AtRo Limited under the...

Parents of Road Accident Victim Entitled To Compensation: Delhi High Court

Justice JR Midha said, “Even if parents are not dependent on their children at the time of an accident, they will certainly be dependent, both financially and emotionally, upon them at the later stage of their life, as the children were dependent upon their parents in their initial years.”

Follow us

Allahabad High Court, on 17th November 2020, dismissed an application filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and refused to quash the charge sheet (dated 26 May 2020), and the entire proceedings of the case, Shani alias Sarvendra v. State of U.P. and Another.

Background

The application, under Section 482 of CrPC, was filed to quash the proceedings of the case State vs. Shani alias Sarvendra.  The charges were originally filed under Section 354 and 506 I.P.C, and the matter was pending before the Judicial Magistrate at Bhoginipur, District Kanpur Dehat. The matter was also filed to quash the charge sheet (dated 26.05.2020) filed in the aforesaid case.

As per the complaint, the Accused (Sarvendra) allegedly misbehaved with the victim, a girl. The girl shared the incident with her mother after arrival at her home.

Submissions at the Court

The Learned Counsel for the Applicants submitted that the allegations against the Accused were false and baseless because while filing the charges the girl said that she narrated the incident to her mother after coming home. However, in her statement recorded (as under Section 164 CrPC) and during the examination of witness (as per Section 161 of CrPC) she has stated that her mother was also with her at the time of the incident.

Further, the Counsel pointed out that the victim’s allegations were based on personal vengeance, as the victim’s brother was implicated recently in a case under Sections 376, 504, and 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3, 2, and 5 of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

On the other hand, the learned Additional Government Advocate (A.G.A) counter-argued that the allegations made in the FIR and material collected during the investigation indicated a clear offence committed by the Accused-Applicant. In the statements recorded further, the victim made clear allegations against the Applicant. Thus, there was a prima facie offence. Hence, the charge could not be quashed.

Legal Position

The Court began its observations by stating that, “the legal position of quashing a criminal proceeding vis a vis quashing a charge-sheet or an FIR is clearly defined, and the latter should be done sparingly and only in exceptional cases”.

When the FIR or the charge-sheet and the material on record did not constitute any prima facie offence, they can be quashed under Section 482 of the CrPC. However, when there was a prima facie offence against the Accused, then the criminal proceedings could not be quashed under the said section.

Decision of the Court

In light of the above observations and with the help of a few remarkable judgments, the Learned Judge Raj Beer Singh, stated that there existed a prima facie offence against the Applicant, and hence the FIR and charge-sheet could not be quashed. In furtherance of the argument of the victim’s Counsel, it was a determination of questions of fact which could be decided only at the trial court. Thus, the Court held that this issue did not fall under the jurisdiction of Section 482. 

The High Court, thus, refused to quash the charge sheet and the proceedings.

Click here to view the judgment.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

[WhatsApp Privacy Policy Row] It’s a Private App, Don’t Use It; Says Delhi High Court

On Monday, while hearing a petition regarding the privacy policy of WhatsApp, the Delhi High Court said, “It is a private app. Don't join it. It is a voluntary thing, don't accept it. Use some other app.”

Madras High Court Asks the State To Reconsider Number of Seats Allotted for Bcm Category

Mr. Shakkiya filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution to issue a Writ of Mandamus. The petition sought to direct...

Gujarat High Court Directs To Register Name of Petitioners in the Society Records as Owners of Property, as per Will

A single-judge bench of Gujarat High Court consisting of Honourable Justice Biren Vaishnav, because probate wasn’t necessary and that the petitioners were entitled to...

If No Complaint Is Filed, No Further Orders Are Required To Be Passed: Telangana High Court

Excerpt In Matlakunta Sundaramma vs The State Of Telangana, on January 8, 2021, the Telangana High Court decided that there is no requirement of passing...

Gujarat High Court Allows Report Filed by Official Liquidator for Dissolution of the Company

The present report had been filed by the Official Liquidator for the dissolution of M/s AtRo Limited under the provisions of Section 497 (6)...

Parents of Road Accident Victim Entitled To Compensation: Delhi High Court

Justice JR Midha said, “Even if parents are not dependent on their children at the time of an accident, they will certainly be dependent, both financially and emotionally, upon them at the later stage of their life, as the children were dependent upon their parents in their initial years.”

Plea Challenging the AIBE Rules Framed by BCI Filed in the Supreme Court

A Writ Petition was presently filed in the Supreme Court by a newly enrolled lawyer challenging the All India Bar Examination Rules 2010 which have been framed by the Bar Council of India which mandates that an advocate has to qualify for the All India Bar Examination (AIBE) to practice law after enrollment.

Bombay High Court: Mere Presence at the Crime Scene Not Enough for Punishment

The Bombay High Court ruled that it cannot be considered a crime if a person is merely present at the crime scene which falls under the Maharashtra Prohibition of Obscene Dance in Hotels and Restaurants and Bar Rooms and Protection of Dignity of Women Act 2016. It also quashed two First Information Reports (FIR) against two individuals who were arrested in a raid at a dance bar by the Santacruz Police, in 2017.

CAIT Files a Plea Against WhatsApp’s New Privacy Policy in the Supreme Court

Confederation of All India Traders (CAIT) has filed a petition against WhatsApp’s new privacy rules in the Supreme Court. The petition says that WhatsApp which is known to render public services by providing a platform to communicate has recently imposed a privacy policy that is unconstitutional, which not only goes against the fundamental rights of citizens but also jeopardizes the national security of our country.

RTI Activist Files a Plea in Bombay High Court Against Bharat Biotech’s Covaxin

On Saturday, a plea has been filed before the Bombay High Court by an activist stating that Bharat Biotech Covaxin had not been granted full approval but a restricted use in clinical trials according to the Drugs Comptroller General of India. The Company's phase 3 trials are ongoing and the DGCI has not made any data available in the public domain for peer- review by independent scientists.

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -