Partly allowed

Julfekar Ali and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC11 Jul 2018CRLP/18005/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal writ petition, the Court declined to quash the impugned FIR alleging criminal conspiracy and attempt to commit mischief. However, the Court directed that if petitioners surrender within 45 days, their bail application would be considered and no coercive action would be taken during that period.

What did the court decide?

FIR not quashed; but 45-day non-coercive period granted if petitioners surrender and apply for bail.

Julfekar Ali and 6 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. - 18005 of 2018 Petitioner :- Julfekar Ali And 6 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Manoj Kumar Mishra,Ratnesh Kumar Shukla

¶3

Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J. Hon'ble Ifaqat Ali Khan,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner(s), learned A.G.A. for the State and Ms Geetika learned counsel for respondent no.3.

¶5

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. 272 of 2018 u/s 147, 148, 308, 452, 323, 504, 324 IPC PS Mau Aima District Allahabad.

¶6

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.

¶7

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.

¶8

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.

¶9

However, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case, petitioners appear and surrender before the court below within 45 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. For a period of 45 days from today or till petitioners surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against petitioners. However, in case, petitioners do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶10

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

¶11

Order Date :- 11.7.2018/SP

Julfekar Ali and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Julfekar Ali and 6 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of U.P. Vs Hifjur Rehman Urf Guddu

State of U.P. Vs Suresh Yadav and 3 Others

State of U.P. Vs Sonu Urf Avinash and Anr.

State of U.P. Vs Raju and 3 Others

Tej Bahadur Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mahamendra @ Bablu Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others