Partly allowed

Komal Prasad and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC9 Mar 2018CRLP/15597/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this matrimonial dispute, the petitioners sought quashing of an FIR alleging dowry demands and harassment. After mediation failure, the High Court dismissed the petition against the primary petitioner but directed that investigation continue without arresting the other petitioners until the police report is filed.

What did the court decide?

Petition against Petitioner 1 dismissed; Investigation to continue; Petitioners 2 to 6 not to be arrested till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.

Komal Prasad and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 15597 of 2017

¶3

Petitioner :- Komal Prasad & 5 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. & 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Yadvendra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Krishna Pratap Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Yadvendra Sigh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri J.K. Singh, learned Brief Holder for the State and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.

¶6

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners for quashing the impugned FIR dated 5.6.2017 registered as case crime no. 310 of 2017, under Sections 498A, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Kotwali Budaun, District Budaun.

¶7

The matter being matrimonial in nature was sent to Mediation Centre by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 8.8.2017. From a perusal of the report of Mediation Centre dated 7.11.2017, the parties had not appeared before the Mediation Centre for mediation and the mediation process between the parties has failed.

¶8

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the marriage between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 4 in the year 2016. Thereafter the impugned FIR has been lodged by the respondent no. 4 roping in the entire family of her husband, petitioner no. 1 containing absolutely false, concocted, vague and sweeping allegations against them that they were demanding dowry from her and her parents and on account of non fulfilment of the alleged demands of dowry she was being tortured and maltreated by them in her matrimonial home. 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 at the petitioners' complicity in the commission of the alleged offence qua the petitioner nos. 2 to 6 hence the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed.

¶9

Per contra learned AGA for the State submitted that the impugned FIR is not liable to be quashed on the basis of the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶10

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:

¶11

(i) Investigation of the aforesaid case shall go on but the petitioner nos. 2 to 6 shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case till the submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., subject to their cooperation during investigation.

¶12

(ii) As far as the petitioner no. 1 is concerned, the petition stand dismissed.

¶13

With this direction, this petition is finally disposed of.

¶14

(Krishna Pratap Singh, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)

¶15

Order Date :- 9.3.2018 Shiraz

Komal Prasad and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Komal Prasad and 5 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pankaj Tyagi and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Pramila Jaiswal and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Anjali Vs State of U P and 8 Others

Smt. Kruna Gupta and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Pradeep Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Reshma Alias Roshani and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others