Sana Fatma v. Mobeen Ali and others) including summoning order dated
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:76349 Court No. - 87 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16970 of 2024 Applicant :- Mobeen Ali Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. List revised. 2. None appeared on behalf of the applicant to press this application.
Legal Reasoning
8. 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 applicant. 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. 9. 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." 10. 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. 11. The instant application does not fall under the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgements 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. It is only after the evidence and trial, it can be seen as to whether the offence, as alleged, has been committed or not. 12. Hence, the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be entertained and is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 9.5.2025 S.P. Digitally signed by :- SANJAY PURI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Arguments
3. Shri Jyoti Kumar Singh, learned AGA is present on behalf of the State respondents. 4. The record reflects that this Court vide order dated 19.06.2024 had referred the matter to the Mediation Center of this Court on the request of learned counsel for the applicant, however, as per report dated 03.08.2024 submitted by the Mediation Center, the applicant did not deposit the amount as directed by the Court vide order dated 19.06.2024, hence, the notices could not be issued to opposite party no.2. Today, when the matter was called out none is present on behalf of the applicant, hence, the Court has proceeded to decide the matter on merits with the assistance of learned AGA and after perusal of record. 5. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant praying for quashing the entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No. 719 of 2021 (Sana Fatma Vs. Mobeen Ali and others) including summoning order dated 31.08.2022 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate/F.T.C.-II, Amroha, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station-Mahila Thana, District-Amroha. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present. The opposite party no.2 herself left her matrimonial house and he is still ready and will to live with his wife. He further submits that applicant has never committed any offence as alleged against him. Further submission is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the court below has utterly failed to consider as no prima facie case is made out against the applicant. He also pointed out certain documents in support of his contention. 7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the application and contended that the allegations levelled in the complaint are very serious. He further submits that the applicant had himself requested the Court to refer the matter for Mediation Center but he did not deposit the amount as directed by the Court. It is further submitted that the Court below has rightly summoned the applicant and no interference is required by this Court in the impugned order as well as the on going proceedings.