Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SANJIV KUMAR
Mohd. Zeeshan Siddiqui – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJIV KUMAR, J.
1. Heard Shri S.M.A Abdy, learned Counsel for the applicants, Shri Ajad Singh, learned Counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A for the State and perused the material on record.
2. This application under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (in short B.N.S.S.) has been filed by the applicants to quash impugned charge-sheet No.13 of 2024 dated 20.02.2024 and cognizance/ summoning order dated 21.03.2024 passed by Incharge Civil Judge (J.D.), Court No. 21, Allahabad in Criminal Case No.112 of 2024 (State Vs. Mohd. Zeeshan Siddiqui and Others) arising out of Case Crime No.128 of 2023, against applicant No. 1 under Sections 354Kha, 452, 352, 323, 504, 506 and 448 I.P.C. and against applicant nos. 2 and 3 under Sections 452, 352, 323, 504, 506 and 448 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Commissionerate, District Prayagraj.
3. Brief facts giving rise to this application are that opposite party no. 2 Prem Kumar Joel lodged an FIR on 9.8.2023 stating that the applicant no.1 was his driver and upon request, his wife permitted him to stay in a vacant room of his house for some period. Thereafter, he refused to vacate the room upon being asked,
The inherent jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 528 BNSS is to prevent abuse of process, and it cannot evaluate evidence or contradictions in witness statements when determining the merit o....
A second FIR cannot be filed for the same offences due to the principles set forth in Section 162, CrPC, and the distinction between civil and criminal disputes is paramount in determining maintainab....
The court ruled that serious offences cannot be quashed based on compromise, emphasizing the need for caution in exercising inherent powers in criminal cases.
Prospective accused lack locus standi to challenge an order directing F.I.R. registration before cognizance is taken, validating the inherent jurisdiction limitations as per Section 528 and Section 1....
Prospective accused cannot challenge the direction for F.I.R. registration and investigation before cognizance, affirming no locus standi in such cases.
The court can quash non-compoundable offences if the parties have amicably settled their disputes, ensuring justice and preventing abuse of process.
The power of quashing criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Code should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases where no cognizable offense is disclosed in the FIR.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
