Writ petition filed to quash an FIR. The Court exempted petitioners 2 and 3 from arrest until the police report is submitted but dismissed the petition regarding petitioner 1 based on prior history.
Investigation to continue; petitioners 2 and 3 exempted from arrest until police report; petition dismissed against petitioner 1.
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. - 19099 of 2018
Petitioner :- Sameer Agarwal And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Akhilesh Singh,Shivam Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Shivam Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the private respondent, learned A.G.A. for the State and impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
This petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to quash the FIR dated 06.07.2018 registered as case crime no.0126 of 2018 under sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 427, 467, 468, 420 I.P.C., Police station Swaroop Nagar, District Kanpur Nagar.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the private respondent that petitioner no.1 indulged in similar case and a case was also registered against him as Case Crime No.55 of 2015 under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 504, 506 IPC, chargesheet and proceedings of which were challenged by him in application under section 482 Cr.P.C No.31993 of 2015 and quashing of the same was refused by this Court on 29.10.2015 (copy of which has been taken on record) against which petitioner no.1 preferred an SLP before the Apex Court in which order of this Court was affirmed.
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 private respondent.
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:
(i) Investigation of the aforesaid case shall go on but petitioner nos.2 and 3 shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., subject to their cooperation during investigation.
(ii) As far as petitioner no.1 is concerned, the petition stand dismissed.
With this direction, this petition is finally disposed of.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
Order Date :- 19.7.2018 Madhurima
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the parties other than petitioner no.1 can be exempted from arrest pending police report submission.
Whether the writ petition challenging the FIR should be dismissed against petitioner no.1 based on prior proceedings.
Sameer Agarwal
2 Others
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
