In this criminal miscellaneous writ petition, the court quashed the prayer to quash an FIR under Section 307 IPC. The court dismissed the petition as it was not inclined to interfere given the lack of police want and sufficient evidence against the petitioner.
The writ petition praying to quash the impugned FIR was rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11597 of 2018
Petitioner :- Jaid Ahmad @ Nanhe @ Narhoo Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Aadesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
An affidavit of compliance of Sri Nitin Tiwari, S.S.P., Allahabad has been filed by Sri Vikas Sahai, learned A.G.A. and the same is taken on record.
Sri Aadesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vikas Sahai, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to quash the impugned FIR dated 20.9.2016 registered as Case Crime No. 582 of 2016, under Section 307 IPC, P.S. Handia, District Allahabad.
Learned A.G.A. pointed out that police personnel, who has submitted police report that petitioner is not wanted in the case, an explanation had been called for and after receiving his explanation the C.O., Handia, Allahabad has taken punitive action and has given warning to the concerned police personnel for not repeating such type of act in future. Learned A.G.A. has further pointed out that petitioner is involved in three other criminal cases except the present one, which is mentioned in the paragraph no. 8 of the affidavit of compliance. There are credible and ample evidences available against the petitioner, Jaid Ahmad @ Nanhe @ Narhoo.
Considering the facts and circumstances and the case and arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, we are not inclined to interfere in the matter and it is, accordingly, rejected.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
Order Date :- 22.5.2018 A.P. Pandey
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court is inclined to quash the FIR under Section 307 IPC despite available evidence and prior complaints by the petitioner against the police.
Whether the petitioner is covered by the protection granted under Section 482 CrPC.
Jaid Ahmad @ Nanhe @ Narhoo
State Of U.P.
Ramesh Sinha
Dinesh Kumar Singh-I
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
