Disposed

Chandan Gupta and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC1 May 2018CRLP/11005/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal miscellaneous writ petition sought quashing of an FIR on grounds of false allegations and injustice. The High Court declined to quash the FIR but granted bail by directing that petitioners not be arrested until the police report is submitted, while also directing the police to complete the investigation within three months citing Supreme Court precedents.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners shall not be arrested till submission of police report; police to conclude investigation within three months.

Chandan Gupta and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 51

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11005 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Chandan Gupta And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Atul Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J. Hon'ble Mahboob Ali,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. 20/2018, under Sections- 498A, 323, 377, 506 IPC & 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S.- Mahila Thana, district- Muzaffar Nagar.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submitted that the impugned first information report has been lodged by the complainant-respondent containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against the petitioner(s) with the ulterior intention of harassing the petitioners; entire family members have been implicated in the present case on the basis of general allegations; 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, hence the impugned F.I.R. is not liable to be quashed.

¶9

Having heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties 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 and also in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana; 2003(4) SCC 675 and Rajesh Sharma and others v. State of U.P. and others decided on 27.7.2017 passed in Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.2013 of 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 and the police authorities are directed to conclude the investigation as early as possible within a period of three months from today.

¶11

With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition is finally disposed of.

¶12

Order Date :- 1.5.2018 Anand

Chandan Gupta and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandan Gupta and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 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

Vikash Patel @ Rasgulla Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Awadhesh Singh and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Irfan and 12 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kaushik @ Jugnu and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ankur Mishra and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Achche Lal Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others