Dismissed

Vikas Chaudhary v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC17 Apr 2018CRLP/28724/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR in a matrimonial dispute. Finding mediation failed and citing Supreme Court precedents, the Court directed non-arrest of the petitioner till the investigation report was filed, subject to Cooperation with police.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner shall not be arrested till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., subject to cooperation with investigation.

Vikas Chaudhary Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 51

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 28724 of 2017

¶3

Petitioner :- Vikas Chaudhary Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Manish Tiwary,Ashwini Kumar Awasthi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

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

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, 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.1071 of 2017, under Sections 498A, 323, 354, 388, 406, 467, 504, 506, 120-B, 147 I.P.C and 3/4 D.P. Act and Section 66, 72 I.T. Act, Police Station-Kaasna, District Gautam Budh Nagar.

¶7

Perusal of the order of this Court dated 21.12.2017 shows that the matter was referred to the Mediation Centre on 21.12.2017. However perusal of the report of the Mediation Centre dated 20.03.2018 shows that the parties are not willing for the mediation.

¶8

In view of above, the Court has no option but to proceed the matter on merits with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

¶9

It has been submitted that the petitioner happens to be the husband; marriage is of the year 2005 and they have two children out of the said wedlock.

¶10

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.

¶11

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

¶12

It has been informed Court that a draft of Rs. 25,000/- which was deposited in compliance of the order of this Court dated 21.12.2017, shall now be returned to the petitioner after deducting expenses of the Mediation Centre.

¶13

Order Date :- 17.4.2018 Radhika

Vikas Chaudhary v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas Chaudhary 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

Km. Nagma Vs State of U.P. and 6 Ors.

Atish Singh and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Smt. Basanti Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Smt. Rekha and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Akhilesh Srivastava and 5 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Arvind Rai Vs State of U.P. and 02 Others