Disposed

Kalyan Singh Pundir and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC23 Apr 2018CRLP/10207/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Court did not quash the FIR but directed that petitioners shall not be arrested till the submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., with a direction to participate in and co-operate with the investigation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners shall not be arrested till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. but shall participate and co-operate with investigation.

Kalyan Singh Pundir and 3 Others Vs State… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 51

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10207 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Kalyan Singh Pundir And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Azhar Hussain Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J. Hon'ble Ifaqat Ali Khan,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner(s) and learned A. G. A. for the State.

¶6

This writ petition has been filed with the prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F. I. R. which has been registered as Case Crime No. 354 of 2016, under Sections- 498A, 323 IPC and section 3/4 D. P. Act, P.S.- Mahila Thana, District- Agra.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submitted that the impugned first information report has been lodged by complainant containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against the petitioner(s) with the ulterior intention of harassing petitioner(s); entire family members have been implicated on the basis of general allegation; apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned F. I. R., no evidence is forthcoming even prima facie indicating at the complicity of the petitioner(s) in the commission of alleged offence and hence the impugned F. I. R. which is a bundle of lies and motivated by malice, is liable to be quashed.

¶8

Per contra, learned A. G. A. has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the impugned F. I. R., it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out.

¶9

After having heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties present and perused the impugned first information as well as the other material brought on record, we are not inclined to quash the impugned F. I. R.

¶10

However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties present and also keeping in view the law as laid down by the Apex Court in the case of B. S. Joshi v. State of Haryana; 2003 (4) SCC 675 , and Rajesh Sharma and Others v. State of U.P. And others (SLP (Crl.) No. 2013 of 2017 decided on 27.7.2017) , we dispose of this writ petition with the direction that the petitioner(s) shall not be arrested in the aforementioned case till submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., however, petitioner(s) shall participate and co-operate with the investigation.

¶11

Order Date :- 23.4.2018 Kuldeep

Kalyan Singh Pundir and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kalyan Singh Pundir and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sweta Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bilal and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shahzad @ Guddan and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Priyanka Vishwas and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bhura Singh @ Vipin and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Genda Lal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others