Partly allowed

Indraj and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Otehrs

Allahabad HC7 Feb 2018CRLP/2389/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Writ Petition regarding quashing of an FIR under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act. The court allowed impleadment of a new petitioner and ordered that investigation continue without arresting petitioners 1-6 until the police report, while dismissing the petition regarding petitioner No. 7.

What did the court decide?

Impleadment of petitioner No. 7 allowed; arrest of petitioners 1-6 stayed till police report; petition of petitioner No. 7 dismissed.

Indraj and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Otehrs — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 42

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 2389 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Indraj And 5 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Otehrs Counsel for Petitioner :- Dewarshi Kumar Rai,Vikas Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- GA

¶4

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

¶5

Ref:Crl Impleadment Application No.2 of 2018

¶6

This Impleadment Application has been filed by the petitioners with prayer to implead Rajendra Kumar son of Indraj as petitioner No.7 in this writ petition.

¶7

This Impleadment Application is duly supported by an affidavit. The counsel for the petitioners does not oppose such impleadment as admittedly she is necessary/proper party to be heard.

¶8

The Impleadment Application is allowed.

¶9

Let necessary impleadment be incorporated within the course of the day.

¶10

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

¶11

Order Date :- 7.2.2018 Pr/-

¶12

Court No. - 42

¶13

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 2389 of 2018

¶14

Petitioner :- Indraj And 5 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Otehrs Counsel for Petitioner :- Dewarshi Kumar Rai,Vikas Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- GA

¶15

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

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶17

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to arrest the petitioners and with further prayer for quashing the impugned FIR dated 10.01.2018 registered as case crime no. 08 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Utraon, District Allahabad.

¶18

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the impugned FIR has been lodged by the respondent no. 4 roping in the entire family of her husband, petitioner no. 7 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. 1 to 6 hence the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed.

¶19

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.

¶20

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:

¶21

(i) Investigation of the aforesaid case shall go on but the petitioner nos.1 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.

¶22

(ii) As far as the petitioner no. 7 is concerned, the petition stand dismissed.

¶23

With this direction, this petition is finally disposed of.

¶24

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

¶25

Order Date :- 7.2.2018 Pr/-

Indraj and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Otehrs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indraj and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Otehrs

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

Pradeep Kumar @ Pradeep Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Morpal and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Kishan Kumar Gupta and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Bhola Alias Gopal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dhananjai Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ashish and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others