Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 3962 (ALL)

Kaneez Fatma v. State of U. P.

2015-12-14

PANKAJ NAQVI

body2015
JUDGMENT Pankaj Naqvi,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 785 of 2013, under Sections 498-A IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Sikandarpur, District Ballia pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Ballia. 3. It is an off shoot of a matrimonial dispute. Applicant is the sister-in-law. The contention of the counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. 4. 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 submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions 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 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. 5. The prayer for quashing the entire proceedings of the aforementioned case is refused. 6. However, it is directed that if applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within four weeks from today and applies for bail, her prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously, in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and Another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. 7. For a period of six weeks from today or till the applicant surrenders and applies for bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. However, in case, applicant does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against her. State of U.P. 7. For a period of six weeks from today or till the applicant surrenders and applies for bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. However, in case, applicant does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against her. The application is finally disposed off.