Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:30055 Court No. - 52 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22884 of 2024 Applicant :- Smt Anuj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- D.M.Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Sri D.M. Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application has been filed by the applicant challenging an order dated 29.04.2024, vide which the application filed under Section 216 Cr.P.C. dated 12.02.2024 has been rejected as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 415 of 2022, State v. Anant and others, arising out of Case Crime No. 226 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Baghpat pending in the court of Civil Judge (J.D.)/ F.T.C., Baghpat. 3. Brief facts of the case are that a first information report was lodged on 21.12.2021 at 11:24 hours through an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. against four named accused persons including the applicant, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 307 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, with the allegation that marriage of O.P. No. 2 was solemnized with Anant Kumar son of the applicant on 08.11.2019 according to Hindu rites and rituals. The alleged accused mentally and physically harassed the O.P. No. 2 raising additional dowry demand. She was abused and beaten by the alleged accused persons. The dowry and other gifts including jewelry, furniture, electronic items, Bajaj Pulsar Motorcycle were given as per capability and capacity of the parents of O.P. No. 2, however, they were raising additional dowry demand of car and two lakh rupees. Details about other ways and manner in which she was harassed, have been given in the first information report. 4. After investigation, a charge sheet was submitted against Anant (husband), Pramod (father-in-law), Smt. Anuj (mother-in-law) on 11.03.2022. Against the applicant chargesheet was submitted only under Sections 498A, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act and she was summoned by order dated 07.04.2022. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that charges were framed on 26.09.2022 against the applicant under Sections 498A, 504, 506 IPC as well as under Section 323 IPC, despite the fact that no chargesheet has been submitted for the offence under Section 323 IPC, therefore, an application under Section 216 Cr.P.C. was filed on 12.02.2024 by the applicant requesting the court to look into the matter as on the basis of evidence collected by the Investigating Officer, chargesheet was not filed for the offence under Section 323 IPC. Neither the applicant was summoned in the said section, however, without there being any new evidence, the charges have been framed under Section 323 IPC which are not in accordance with law. The aforesaid application has been rejected by the order impugned dated 29.04.2024 in an illegal manner without application of judicial mind and without considering the aforesaid fact that no new evidence has been placed before the court concerned to frame charge under Section 323 IPC, thus, the said order is wholly erroneous, illegal and unsustainable in the eyes of law and is liable to be set aside. 6. The order framing charges under Section 323 IPC is against the settled principles of law. The applicant has already been released on bail under Sections 498A, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act by the court below. 7. Learned A.G.A., on the other hand, submits that there is no illegality or infirmity in the order dated 29.04.2024 as ample opportunity had already been afforded to the applicant at the time of framing of charge, to which no objection was raised. The charges have been framed on the basis of material placed before the court concerned as collected by the Investigating Officer and there was no occasion to consider any new evidence at the time of framing of charge. Filing of application after two years from the date on which charges were framed is nothing but delaying tactics when the trial is nearly towards conclusion. He further submits that the applicant ought to have raised objection before the trial court to prove that the offence under Section 323 IPC is not made out against her and at this stage that too after two years of framing of charges no such application could have been moved just to linger on the matter when on the basis of material collected by the Investigating Officer, as discussed in the order impugned, prima facie offence under Section 323 IPC was made out against the applicant. 8. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perusal of the record, this Court does not find any good ground to interfere in the matter. 9. The application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed. Order Date :- 28.2.2025 DS Digitally signed by :- DIGAMBER SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad