Partly allowed

Kripa Shankar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC5 Jan 2018CRLP/116/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court refused the petition to quash the FIR but directed that the petitioner shall not be arrested until the submission of the police report under Section 173(2) CrPC or collection of credible evidence, whichever is earlier.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner shall not be arrested in the case until submission of police report under Section 173(2) CrPC or credible evidence is collected.

Kripa Shankar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 10

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 116 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Kripa Shankar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- U.C. Chaturvedi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Govind Mathur,J. Hon'ble Ashok Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A. G. A. for the State.

¶6

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. dated 10.12.2017 which has been registered as Case Crime No. 192 of 2017, under Sections-147, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police StationKoirauna, District Bhadohi.

¶7

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that Original Suit No. 555 of 2017 with regard to property in question is pending between the petitioners and the respondent no.3 and the present proceedings have been initiated in order to built pressure upon the petitioners, which is bad in law. He further submitted that apart from the bald allegations made in the F.I.R., which is a bundle of lies and product of malice, no credible evidence is forthcoming, even prima facie, indicating that any such incident had taken place, hence the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. submitted that from the perusal of 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

From the perusal of the F.I.R. it appears that on the basis of the allegations made therein prima facie cognizable offence is made out hence, there is no scope for interfering with the impugned F.I.R.

¶10

Therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned F.I.R. is refused.

¶11

However, considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners and nature of allegations made in the F.I.R., it is directed that the petitioners shall not be arrested in the aforementioned case till submission of police report under Section 173 (2) or till credible evidence is collected, whichever is earlier.

¶12

With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition is disposed of finally.

¶13

Order Date :- 5.1.2018 A.Kr.*

¶14

[Ashok Kumar, J.] [Govind Mathur, J.]

Kripa Shankar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kripa Shankar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nadeem Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Jai Prakash Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Devendra and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Vishal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Nanku Mallah Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Kaushlendra Pandey Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others