Court No. - 76
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 45576 of 2019
Applicant :- Smt. Sunaina Devi And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Sengar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
On the matter being taken up, Mr. Ajay Sengar, learned counsel for the applicants states that since the applicant nos. 2 and 3, namely, Smt. Saroj Tiwari and Pradip Tiwari have already been enlarged on bail, he does not want to press the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on behalf of applicant nos. 2 and 3 and therefore, the same be dismissed as not pressed at the behest of applicant nos. 2 and 3.
Prayer so made is allowed.
The present application is dismissed as not presed at the behest of applicant nos. 2 and 3.
Office to proceed accordingly.
Order on the application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on behalf of applicant no.1, namely, Smt. Sunaina Devi.
Heard Mr. Ajay Sengar, learned counsel for the applicant no.1 and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the order dated 25th September, 2018 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No. 1314 of 2018 (State Vs. Pradip Tewari & Others) arising out of Case Crime No. 64 of 2018, under Section 306 I.P.C. Police Station-Shahb Ganj, District Chandauli pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Chakiya, Chandauli.
Learned counsel for the applicant no.1 submits that the applicant no.1 being the mother-in-law of the deceased, is 65 years old lady. She is innocent. The entire prosecution case is false and fabricated. The son of the applicant no.1, namely, Pradip Tiwari was looking after his parents and the deceased restrained him to do the same. When the son of applicant no.1 refused to do the same, the deceased being short tempered lady had taken the extreme step of committing suicide by hanging herself. The applicant no.1 has no concern with the suicide of the deceased. It is further submitted that the first information report has been lodged under Section 306 I.P.C. and there is no direct evidence upto this stage implicating the present applicant in the aforesaid case crime number. It is further submitted that the evidence required to prove the charge under Section 306 I.P.C. is subjected to trial evidence but upto this stage, there is no evidence to show that the applicant has abetted in the commission of the alleged crime by way of aid, conspiracy, or instigation.
In view of the above, matter requires consideration.
Notice on behalf of opposite party no. 1 has been accepted by learned A.G.A.
Issue notice to opposite party no.2 returnable at an early date.
Opposite parties may file their counter affidavits within four weeks. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within two weeks thereafter.
List thereafter.
Till the next date of listing, further proceedings of the aforesaid criminal shall be kept in abeyance against the applicant no.1 only.
Connect with Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 22779 of 2019 (Chandra Bhan Vs. State of U.P. & Another).
(Manju Rani Chauhan, J.)
Order Date :- 18.12.2019 Sushil/-