Disposed

Sanjay Yadav and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC30 May 2018CRLP/1927/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR dated Crime No. 646 of 2017 under various IPC sections. After mediation failed, the court referred to Supreme Court precedents and directed that the petitioner shall not be arrested pending the submission of the police report, while directing police to conclude investigation early. Petitioners were also directed to cooperate.

What did the court decide?

Order that the petitioner shall not be arrested in the aforementioned case till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.

Sanjay Yadav and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 51

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1927 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Sanjay Yadav And 5 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Imran Mabood Khan Counsel for Respondent :- GA

¶4

Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J. Hon'ble Mahboob Ali,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This writ petition has been filed for issuing a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned FIR registered as Case Crime No.646 of 2017, under Sections 323, 328, 498A, 504, 506 I.P.C, Police Station-Shivpur, District Varanasi.

¶7

Perusal of the order passed by another Bench of this Court dated 30.01.2018 shows that the matter was referred to the Mediation Centre. However perusal of the report of the Mediation Centre dated 23.05.2018 shows that parties could not arrive at any agreement and mediation has failed.

¶8

In view of above, the Court proceeds to hear the matter on merits. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the impugned first information report has been lodged in pursuance of the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. moved by the complainant-respondent containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against the petitioners with the ulterior intention of harassing the petitioners; entire family members have been implicated in the present case. It has been mentioned in paragraph no.10 that there is no medical evidence or documentary evidence in support of the allegations of poisoning and marriage is of the year 2008.

¶9

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, no purpose would be served in keeping the case pending before this Court and also in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana; 2003(4) SCC 675 and Rajesh Sharma and others v. State of U.P. and others decided on 27.7.2017 passed in Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.2013 of 2017, we dispose of this writ petition with the direction that the petitioner shall not be arrested in the aforementioned case till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. However, petitioner shall participate and co-operate with the investigation and the police authorities are directed to conclude the investigation as early as possible.

¶10

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

¶11

Order Date :- 30.5.2018

¶12

Radhika

Sanjay Yadav and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Yadav 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

saroj and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Sushmi Kumari and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Diskha Sharma and Another Vs State of U.P. and 02 Others

Shadab and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sohan Pal and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Manmohan and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others