# Kalika Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. & Anr

- **Citation:** (2023) 5 ILRA 1252
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2023-02-28
- **Case number:** Application U/S 482. No. 33349 of 2022
- **Bench:** Shekhar Kumar Yadav
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/kalika-pratap-singh-v-state-of-u-p-anr-50166
- **Pages:** 5

## Headnote

(A) Criminal Law - The Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - Inherent
power,
Section
173(8)
-

further
investigation into the matter , Indian
Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 420,
376,306, 406,120-B, Dowry prohibition
Act,1961 - Section 3/4 , Information
Technology Act , 2000 - Section 67 -
Publishing
of
information
which
is
obscene in electronic form - Court cannot
adjudicate disputed question of fact under
Section 482 Cr.P.C; only prima facie case
considered - Accused's disputed defense
not considered at this stage - Applicant
has discharge rights under Section 239 or
227/228 Cr.P.C. .(Para - 11)

Accused developed a friendship with deceased -
had a long relationship - suddenly withdrew -
potentially
causing
depression
or
embarrassment for victim - case not under
Section 306 on refusal to marry - rather a case
where accused had developed a relationship
with the victim and later refused to continue -
victim may have considered poison as a possible
solution.(Para -12 )

HELD:- Court cannot examine relationship
between deceased and applicant at this stage,
as it is not relevant to charge sheet stage. Court
must examine the documents collected during
investigation by police and any alleged evidence
during trial. Court cannot examine any defences
that have not yet been placed before the court
below, as the stage of placing the defence
version does not arise at this stage. Request for
quashing case proceedings and charge sheet
refused; application lacks force.(Para - 12,13)

Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. dismissed. (E7)

List of Cases cited:

## Text

1252 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
the trial and conclude the same as
expeditiously as possible keeping in view the
time frame as directed by the Apex Court.

19. With aforesaid observation, the
application is disposed of.
----------
(2023) 5 ILRA 1252
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 28.02.2023

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J.

Application U/S 482. No. 33349 of 2022

Kalika Pratap Singh ...Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. ...Opposite Parties

Counsel for the Applicant:
Sri Shri Krishna Mishra, Sri Ajay Mishra, Sri
Sheshadri Trivedi, Sri Satish Trivedi (Sr.
Adv.)

Counsel for the Opposite Parties:
G.A., Sri Ashish Pandey, Pragya Pandey, Sri
Radhey Shyam Shukla

(A) Criminal Law - The Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - Inherent
power,
Section
173(8)
-

further
investigation into the matter , Indian
Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 420,
376,306, 406,120-B, Dowry prohibition
Act,1961 - Section 3/4 , Information
Technology Act , 2000 - Section 67 -
Publishing
of
information
which
is
obscene in electronic form - Court cannot
adjudicate disputed question of fact under
Section 482 Cr.P.C; only prima facie case
considered - Accused's disputed defense
not considered at this stage - Applicant
has discharge rights under Section 239 or
227/228 Cr.P.C. .(Para - 11)

Accused developed a friendship with deceased -
had a long relationship - suddenly withdrew -
potentially
causing
depression
or
embarrassment for victim - case not under
Section 306 on refusal to marry - rather a case
where accused had developed a relationship
with the victim and later refused to continue -
victim may have considered poison as a possible
solution.(Para -12 )

HELD:- Court cannot examine relationship
between deceased and applicant at this stage,
as it is not relevant to charge sheet stage. Court
must examine the documents collected during
investigation by police and any alleged evidence
during trial. Court cannot examine any defences
that have not yet been placed before the court
below, as the stage of placing the defence
version does not arise at this stage. Request for
quashing case proceedings and charge sheet
refused; application lacks force.(Para - 12,13)

Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. dismissed. (E7)

List of Cases cited:

1. Vinay Tyagi Vs Irshad Ali @ Deepak & ors.,
2012 (2) Supreme (SC) 903

2. M/s Pepsi Food Ltd & anr. Vs Special Judicial
Magistrate & ors., 1998 UPCr.R. paged 118

3. Mandar Deepak Pawar Vs The St. of Maha. &
anr., (Criminal Appeal No.442 of 2022)

4. Gangula Mohan Reddy Vs St. of A.P., (2010)1
SCC 750

5. Daxaben Vs The St. of Guj. & ors., SLP
Criminal No. 1132-1155 of 2022

6. M/s Neeharika Infrastructure PVT Ltd. Vs St.
of Maha., AIR 2021 SC 1918

7. R.P. Kapur Vs St. of Punj., A.I.R. 1960 S.C.
866

8. St. of Haryana Vs Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426

9. St. of Bihar Vs P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192

10. Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs Mohd.
Saraful Haq & anr., (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.)
283,
5 All. Kalika Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1253
11. St. of M.P. Vs Awadh Kishore Gupta & ors.,
(2004) 1 SCC 691

12. Dr. Monica Kumar & anr. Vs St. of U.P. &
Ors., (2008) 8 SCC 781

(Delivered by Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar
Yadav, J.)

1. Heard Mr Satish Triv edi, learned
senior counsel assisted by Mr Sheshadri
Trivedi, learned counsel for the applicant,
Mr Radhey Shyam Shukla, learned counsel
for the private respondent no. 2, learned
AGA for the State and perused the record.

2. By means of this application,
applicant has prayed for quashing of the
entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.
13802 of 2022 (State Vs Kalika Pratap
Singh) arising out of Case Crime No. 401
of 2019, Under Sections 420, 376,306,
406,120-B IPC and Section 67 of IT Act
and Section 3/4 of D.P.Act, P.S. Jhunsi,
District Prayagraj including the charge
sheet dated 12.05.2022 and the summoning
order dated 18.06.2022.

3. Brief facts of the case are that on
the basis of the application filed by
opposite party no. 2 an FIR was registered
on 2.5.2019 bearing case Crime No. 401 of
2019, under Section 420 IPC and Section
3/4 of D. P. Act at P.S. Jhunsi, District
Prayagraj alleging therein that applicant
and daughter of opposite party no. 2 came
in contact through facebook and they had
visited Bhopal twice and were in talking
terms with each other and, thereafter,
father-in-law of informant and two of his
uncles including the informant went to the
house of the applicant at Allahabad and talk
took place on 05/07/2017 and thereafter
informant and his uncles went to the house
of the applicant's brother at Mathura on
20/08/2017 and after that applicant's
brother came to my house at Bhopal to see
the girl and returned thereafter. It is further
alleged that exactly after one year i.e. on
18/08/2018, informant is said to have gone
to
Mathura
where
applicant's
uncle,
namely,
Jai
Prakash
Singh,
brother,
namely, Arvind Singh and another brother,
namely, Vishwanath Pratap Singh were
present and there the informant is said to
have paid Rs. 24,80,000/- and again
informant is said to have gone to the house
of applicant at Allahabad on 16/11/2018,
where the date of marriage was finalized
and Tilak's date has been fixed on
07/05/2019 and Marriage's date have been
fixed for 15/05/2019. It is further alleged
that the D'zire Car, which was promised to
be given on Tilak ceremony has been
purchased by the informant on 30/04/2019
and when the date of marriage and Tilak
came closer and the invitation cards have
been distributed and the dates reached
nearer, then the applicant, without any
reason, is said to have denied for marriage
because family members of the applicant
are said to have refused for marriage.
Thereafter, informant and other family
members including the victim are said to
have reached the applicant's house at
Allahabad and there they were threatened
to ran away from his house. On this,
daughter of the informant is said to have
consumed some poisonous substance as a
result of which her condition worsened and
at that time applicant is said to have taken
the victim to Swarooprani Hospital and got
admitted her there and when her condition
could not be approved, she was lateron
transferred and admitted to Shakuntala
Hospital.

4. During investigation a suicide note
of
victim
was
recovered
by
the
Investigating
Officer,
thereafter,
the
Investigating Officer added the new section
1254 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
as Sections 376, 306, 406, 120-B IPC and
Section 67 of I. T. Act and after
investigation, Investigating Officer found
no case against the applicant and therefore
submitted final report against the applicant
on 18.09.2021. Which was objected by the
mother of the deceased by moving
application before the police authority for
further investigation into the matter upon
which an enquiry was ordered and the
enquiry officer recommended for further
investigation into the matter under Section
173(8) Cr.P.C. thereafter vide order dated
18.2.2022 SSP, Prayagraj ordered further
investigation into the matter and pursuant
to
the
order
dated
18.02.2022
the
Investigating
Officer
conducted
investigation
and
thereafter
submitted
charge sheet against the applicant on
7.5.2022 in Case Crime No. 401 of 2019,
under Sections 420, 376,306,406,120-B
IPC and Section 67 of IT Act and Section
3/4 of D.P.Act upon which the court below
took
cognizance
vide
order
dated
12.05.2022 and summoned the applicant to
face the trial. Further, NBW has also been
issued against the applicant vide order
dated 26.08.2022.

5. It is submitted that the victim and
applicant used to chat on facebook and
with the passage of time, they developed
love and intimacy and with the consent of
the family members their marriage was
settled but on coming to know that
daughter of the informant is involved in
several criminal cases including on
registered as Case Crime No. 0005 of
2018, under Sections 384, 388, 120-B
IPC at P.S. Crime Branch, Bhopal
Madhya Pradesh, lodged by one Member
of
Legislative
Assembly,
Madhya
Pradesh for allegedly blackmailing him,
and after coming of the said fact into
knowledge of the family members of the
applicant, the applicant denied to perform
said marriage.

6. It is contended by learned counsel
for the applicant that the police has not
taken
permission
of
Magistrate
for
conducting further investigation into the
matter and supplementary charge sheet
has been submitted in gross violation of
the judgement of Apex Court in the case
of Vinay Tyagi Vs Irshad Ali @
Deepak and others, 2012 (2) Supreme
(SC) 903.

7. It is further contended by learned
counsel for the applicant that the order
dated 12.05.2022 has been passed without
applying his judicial mind as the same has
been passed without considering the nature
of allegations and the evidence both oral
and documentary. In support of this
argument, he relied upon the case of M/s
Pepsi Food Ltd and another Vs Special
Judicial Magistrate and others, 1998
UPCr.R.
paged
118.
It
is
further
contended by learned counsel for the
applicant that it is not rape if consensual
physical relationship was based on a
genuine promise of marriage, which could
not be fulfilled. In support of this argument,
he relied upon the case of Mandar Deepak
Pawar Vs The State of Maharashtra and
another, (Criminal Appeal No.442 of
2022). It is further contended that making
refusal to marry by the applicant to the
deceased cannot be said to be an instigation
on the part of the applicant. It is further
submitted that abetment involves a mental
process
of
instigating
a
person
or
intentionally aiding a person in doing a
thing. Without a positivist act on the part of
the accused to instigate or aid in
committing suicide, conviction cannot be
sustained. It is further contended that in
order to convict a person under Section 306
5 All. Kalika Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1255
IPC there has to be a clear mens-rea to
commit offence. It also requires an active
act or direct act which leads deceased to
commit suicide. In support of his argument,
he relied upon the case of Gangula Mohan
Reddy Vs State of Andhra Pradesh
(2010)1 SCC 750.

8. The contention of the learned
counsel for the applicant is that no offence
against the applicant is disclosed and the
present prosecution has been instituted with
malafide intentions for the purposes of
harassment.

9. Mr R. P. Mishra, learned AGA
opposed the application and submitted that
a suicide note in the handwriting of
deceased is found and the same been sent
before the handwriting expert and there is a
report to the effect that same was written
by the victim herself. The Investigating
Officer,
investigated
the
matter
and
submitted
charge
sheet
against
the
applicant. It is not a case of grave injustice
or abuse of process of law. It is further
contended that further investigation under
section 173(8) Cr.P.C. is statutory right of
Police which does not requires permission
from any Magistrate. In this connection, he
has drawn attention of this Court to the
provisions enshrined under section 173(8)
Cr.P.C. which does not contemplate any
prior permission of the Magistrate. Learned
AGA as well as learned counsel for
respondent no. 2 has further claimed that
judgment of Apex Court in Vinay Tyagi's
case (Supra) is not applicable in the instant
case as the same is against the express
provisions of Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. He
has further argued that even if it is assumed
that prior permission of Magistrate is
necessary, then absence of prior permission
is an irregularity which has been cured
subsequently by the Magistrate by taking
cognizance on the supplementary charge
sheet.

10. Further learned AGA relied upon
the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in
the case of Daxaben Vs. The State of
Gujrat & Ors, SLP Criminal No. 11321155 of 2022 decided on 29.07.2022 to
contend that in this case a opinion was
exhibited
that
even
indirect
act
of
incitement to the commission of suicide
would constitute the offence of abetment of
suicide. In the said case, it has also been
said that in exercise of power under Section
482 of the Cr.P.C., the Court does not
examine the correctness of the allegation in
the complaint except in exceptionally rare
cases where it is patently clear that the
allegations are frivolous or do not disclose
any offence.

11. 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
in
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 Haryana Vs. Bhajan
Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar
Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192,
lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd.
Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another
(Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283, State of
M.P. Vs Awadh Kishore Gupta and
others [(2004) 1 SCC 691, and Dr.
Monica Kumar and Another Vs State of
UP and Others, (2008) 8 SCC 781. The
1256 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
disputed defence of the accused cannot be
considered at this stage. Moreover, the
applicant has got a right of discharge under
Section 239 or 227/228 Cr.P.C. or 245
Cr.P.C. as the case may be, before the court
below and he is free to take all the
submissions
in
the
said
discharge
application before the trial court.

12. Whether accused instigated
deceased to take poison or not cannot be
considered at this stage. The other facts
which are relevant that accused developed
friendship with deceased and he had
relation with her for quite some time and
all of a sudden, he withdrew from
relationship, which might cause serious
depression to victim or breaking of
relationship with her might have caused
such embarrassment to her so that she may
not have thought of any other recourse but
to consume poison. It is not a case where
accused has been charged of offence only
under Section 306 on mere refusal to marry
but here the applicant had developed
relationship with victim from before. He
continued with relationship for quite some
time and later on he refused to continue
with relationship and to marry the victim.
Whether it is a case of entering into
relationship with deceased with or without
consent or whether he played any active
direct or indirect role which leads deceased
to commit suicide cannot be looked into at
this stage. At the stage of charge sheet,
Court concerned has to examine only upon
the
documents
collected
during
investigation by Police, who submitted
charge sheet and all other evidence as
alleged by the applicant will be examined
during trial when defence is adduced by
both the parties. While considering prayer
for quashing of charge sheet, this Court
cannot examine any defence of accused
which has yet to be placed before Court
below. Stage of placing the defence version
does not arise at the stage of charge sheet
and, therefore, this Court will not examine
alleged defence at this stage.

13. In the circumstances, the prayer
for quashing the proceedings of case as
well as charge sheet is refused. The
application has no force and is accordingly
dismissed.
----------
(2023) 5 ILRA 1256
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 03.05.2023

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J.

Application U/S 482. No. 34816 of 2022

Avtar Singh & Anr. ...Applicants
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. ...Opposite Parties

Counsel for the Applicants:
Ms. Gunjan Jadwani

Counsel for the Opposite Parties:
G.A.

(A) Criminal Law - The Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - Inherent
power - Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition
and Land Reforms Act, 1950 - Section 229,
The Prevention of Damage to Public
Property Act, 1984 - Sections 2 and 3 , The
UP Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings
Act, 1960 - Section 11(2), 13(2) -
Criminal proceedings can be quashed in
exercise of powers under Section 482 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
(CrPC) when it is found that the attempt
was to give a "cloak of criminal offence"
to a dispute which is essentially of civil
nature. (Para - 12)

Applicants
accused
of
ploughing
surplus
agricultural land - filed FIR - Charge sheet filed,