Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 186264 (ALL)

SHOBHIT MAHESHWARI v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPT. OF HOME CIVIL SECTT. LKO AND OTHERS

/8167/2023 · 2025-12-04

Rajeev Singh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8167 of 2023 Court No. - 14 HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J. 1. Heard Sri Ram Raj, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri H.G.S. Parihar, Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Meenakshi Parihar, learned counsel for the private respondent and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present application is filed with the following prayer :- "Quash the impugned charge sheet bearing no.01 dated 31.5.2022, Charge Sheet No.02 dated 30.6.2022, the order of the learned Magistrate dated 13.10.2022 as well as entire proceedings of the Case Crime No.300 of 2021 under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station - Kotwali City, District Hardoi." 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the match of marriage of applicant and respondent no.3 was taken from the matrimonial site, i.e., Shaadi.com, thereafter, they decided to solemnize the marriage and marriage was solemnized on 2.3.2020 at Akshaypatra Mandir Lawn, Vrindavan, Mathura, which was registered on 12.3.2020 before the Marriage Registrar, Hardoi. He further submits that applicant and respondent no.3 were working in the United States of America and as per their plan, they wanted to fly for Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ram Raj, Rishabh Raj Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Abhiuday Pratap Singh, Meenakshi Singh Parihar, Pragya Singh, Rishi Saxena Shobhit Maheshwari .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Dept. Of Home Civil Sectt. Lko And Others .....Opposite Party(s) U.S.A. but due to Pandemic of Covid-19, they could not go to the U.S.A. He also submits that respondent no.3 was enjoying her matrimonial life but due to some misunderstanding on the basis of incorrect facts, F.I.R. of the case in question was lodged. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that on 27.5.2020, telephonic conversation was taken place in between Umesh Maheshwari - father of the applicant and Atul Agarwal (informant) - father of Pakhi Agarwal, which was also recorded but no content was found related to the demand of dowry as well as victimization (typed copy of the conversation is annexed as Annexure No.6). He further submits that all these facts were not considered by the Investigating Officer and charge sheet was submitted only after recording the statement of informant, his wife and daughter/respondent no.3 under Section 161 Cr.P.C., therefore, indulgence of this Court is necessary. 5. Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer of the applicant and submits that detail investigation was conducted by the Investigating Officer and on the basis of material evidences, charge sheet has been filed. He also submits that all these defence of the applicant can be considered at appropriate stage, therefore, present applications are liable to be dismissed. 6. Sri H.G.S. Parihar, Senior Advocate submits that after detail investigation, charge sheet has been filed against the applicant and the evidences collected by the Investigating officer cannot be examined at this stage in the form of mini trial, therefore, present application is liable to be dismissed. 7. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, going through the contents of the application as well as other relevant material, it is evident that genesis of the prosecution in question is matrimonial dispute as marriage of applicant and respondent no.3 was solemnized on 2.3.2020 and after some time, F.I.R. of the case in question was lodged, thereafter charge sheet was filed by the Investigating Officer on the basis of evidences collected by him. It is also evident that there are specific allegations against the applicant in A482 No. 8167 of 2023 2 the statement of respondent no.3 recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., therefore, the evidences collected by the Investigating Officer cannot be evaluated in the form of mini trial, in such circumstances, the present application has no merit and same is hereby, dismissed. December 4, 2025 GauraV/- A482 No. 8167 of 2023 3 (Rajeev Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench