Application U/S 482 of CRPC, 1973

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NAINITAL
CRIMINAL MISC JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. _________OF 2018
Application u/s 482 of CrPC, 1973
Applicants Mrs. Divyanshi Singh, w/o Abhishek Singh, a/o 35 years, r/o 67, In front of Jail
Building, Sarojinni Nagar, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh.............................................Applicant
v.
Mr. Abhishek Singh, s/o Subham Singh, a/o 37 years, r/o 85, opp. Gyatri Mandir, Gomti Nagar,
Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh………………………………………………………………Respondent.
INDEX
Sr. Particulars Exhibit Page

No. No.
1 Synopsis,
Authorities,
Points to be urged
2 Memo of Application
3 Impugned Order of court “A”
4 Complaint of the Respondent No.2 “C”
1
Building, Sarojinni Nagar, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh.............................................Applicant
v.
Mr. Abhishek Singh, s/o Subham Singh, a/o 37 years, r/o 85, opp. Gyatri Mandir, Gomti Nagar,
Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh………………………………………………………………Respondent.
SYNOPSIS
Sr.No. Date Particulars Exhibit

1 Complaint filed by Respondent No.2
2 Impugned Order passed by Court
3 Summons issued by the High Court
4 Summons received by the Applicants
5 Revision Application filed by the Applicants
6 Impugned Order passed by Judge
2
THE POINTS TO BE URGED
(a) “acts” and “omission” attributed towards the accused person in the Complaint does not
constitute any offence; or
(b) No incidence of offence as alleged in the Complaint has happened; or
(c) the Complaint contains “bare allegation” without attributing “acts or omission” on the part of
the accused person, towards the commission of the offences, that is to say, there is not an iota of
any incriminating material against the accused so as to warrant the issuance of summons ;
(d) There is unimpeachable evidence to show that the offence could not have been committed by
the accused person as alleged, and otherwise, the accused would be needlessly harassed of the
inevitable agony of criminal trials.
(e) That Article 21 of the Constitution of India commands that “No person shall be deprived of
his life and liberty” except according to the procedure established by law. In Criminal
jurisprudence, the only safeguard available to an innocent person is the “scrupulous and strict
adherence” to the procedure prescribed in concluding the “guilt of the accused person”. Thus,
whenever, any of the “prescribed procedure” is not “duly followed and complied with”, and
where such non compliance, expressly or by necessary implication, frustrate the personal liberty
of the accused person, the violence to fundamental right of the accused enshrined under Article
21 of the Constitution is imminent.
(f) That it is elementary principle of criminal jurisprudence that criminal liability arises on
account of conduct, act or omission on the part of a person and not merely on account of holding
an office or position in a Company.
(g) That institution of any judicial proceedings against a person carries an implicit degree of
coercion and no judicial proceedings should be triggered at the whims and fancies of the
litigants, which otherwise amounts to sheer harassment, embarrassment, and substantial expenses
to the person saddled with unwarranted litigation and most importantly, causes the waste of the
precious time of the court in hearing the frivolous and meritless litigations.
(h) The Applicant state that there is not an iota of evidence produced by the Respondent so as to
suggest that there exist any ground whatsoever to proceed against Applicant.
3
(i) The Applicant state that it is elementary principle of criminal jurisprudence that criminal
liability arises on account of conduct, act or omission on the part of a person and not merely on
account of holding an office or position in a Company.
(j) The Applicant state that to launch a prosecution against the directors, there must be specific
allegation in the Complaint, as to the part played by them in the transaction.
(k) The Applicant submit that institution of any judicial proceedings against a person carries an
implicit degree of coercion and no judicial proceedings should be triggered at the whims and
fancies of the litigants, which otherwise amounts to sheer harassment, embarrassment, and
substantial expenses to the person saddled with unwarranted litigation and most importantly,
causes the waste of the precious time of the court in hearing the frivolous and meritless
litigations.
The Applicants therefore, most respectfully pray as under –
(a) That the impugned Order of issuance of process by the Magistrate at Nainital Court at, in the
above Complaint No., dated April 15 against Applicant, and that of the Judge dated April 15 be
quashed and set aside;
(b) That during the pendency of the present Application, execution of Order dated _______ and
proceedings in the above Complaint against Applicant Nos._______ be stayed;
(c) Any other relief as this Hon’ble Court deems fit having regard to facts and circumstances of
the case.
Advocate for the

Applicant
4
Verification
I, Divyanshi Singh the Applicant hereinabove, do hereby solemnly declare that what is
stated in Paras A-J are true to my own knowledge, and what is stated in Paras A-J are based
on information and legal advice which I believe to be true and correct.
Solemnly declared at Nainital

April 15 2018
Applicant
5
AFFIDAVIT
Building, Sarojinni Nagar, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh.............................................Deponent
I, the deponent above named do hereby solemnly affirm on oath as under:-
1. That the deponent is plaintiff in the above mentioned suit and as such is fully aware of
the facts deposed to above.
2. That the deponent has filed the Complaint under S 482 crpc against the respondent, that
the contents of the said suit may be read and understood as a part of this affidavit which
are not being repeated herewith for the sake of brevity.
3. That the deponent hereby verifies that contents made in the suit are correct & true.
4. That the suit of the deponent is liable to be allowed for reliefs claimed.
…………….Deponent
Verification
I, the deponent above named do hereby verify that the contents of paragraph 1-4 of the above
affidavit are true to the best of knowledge & belief. Nothing material has been concealed
herewith & no part of it is untrue.
Verified at Nainital
…………….Deponent
6
7

Application U/S 482 of CRPC, 1973

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Application U/S 482 of CRPC, 1973

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NAINITAL

CRIMINAL MISC JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. _________OF 2018