Partly allowed

Sadanand and 8 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC29 May 2018CRLP/14072/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR alleging false implication in a civil dispute. While dismissing the petition for most petitioners, the court directed restraint on arresting two female petitioners pending the police report.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed except regarding non-arrest of petitioner nos. 8 & 9 till police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. is submitted.

Sadanand and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 14072 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Sadanand And 8 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Syed Farman Ahmad Naqvi,Syed Ahmed Faizan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ankur Tondon

¶4

Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.

¶5

Heard Sri S.F.A. Naqvi, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Ankur Tandon, learned counsel for the caveator-respondent no.4, Sri N.K.Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned FIR as well as material brought on record.

¶6

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to quash the FIR dated 2.4.2018, registered as case crime No.293 of 2018, under Sections 323, 506, 427, 395, 34 I.P.C., Police Station Lanka, District Varanasi.

¶7

It has been submitted by the petitioners that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case.He further submitted that a civil dispute has been converted into a criminal case just to pressurize the petitioner and to remove them from their only place of livelihood. He next submitted that the impugned FIR has been lodged by the respondent no.4 containing absolutely false, concocted, vague and sweeping allegations against the petitioners. It has next been submitted that apart from the bald allegations made in the FIR no credible evidence whatsoever is forthcoming even prima facie indicating the petitioners' complicity in the commission of the alleged offence qua the petitioner nos. 8 & 9 who are ladies,hence the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed.

¶8

Per contra, learned counsel for the caveator respondent no.4 as well as learned AGA for the State opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR.

¶9

After having heard learned counsel for the parties present and perused the impugned FIR as well as the other material brought on record, we dispose of this writ petition with the following directions:

¶10

(i) Investigation of the aforesaid case shall go on but the petitioner nos.8 & 9 who are ladies shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case till the submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., subject to their

¶11

cooperation during investigation.

¶12

(ii) As far as the petitioner nos. 1 to 7 are concerned, the petition stand dismissed.

¶13

With this direction, this petition is finally disposed of.

¶14

(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)

¶15

Order Date :- 29.5.2018/NS

Sadanand and 8 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sadanand and 8 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rakesh Agarwal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Virendra Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Premchand Jaisal Vs State of U.P.

Prabhat Mohan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Haneef Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Urman Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others