Disposed

Narendra Kumar @ Bali v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC15 Feb 2018CRLP/3234/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed to quash a domestic violence domestic assault FIR where allegations of rape were added after statement recording. Court directed that petitioner shall not be arrested until police report is submitted but must cooperate with investigation. Petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Directed that petitioner shall not be arrested till submission of police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. but shall cooperate with investigation.

Narendra Kumar @ Bali Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 3234 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Narendra Kumar @ Bali Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rizwan Ahamad Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

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

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the petitioner is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Rizwan Ahamad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ashish Pandey, learned A. G. A. for the State.

¶7

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer to quash the F. I. R. dated 26.6.2017 which has been registered as Case Crime No. 0061 of 2017, under Sections 498-A, 323, 354 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District-Bhagpat.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the son of Nanad of the respondent no.3 though the impugned FIR was lodged u/s 498-A, 323, 354 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act in which their arrest have been stayed in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 27313 of 2017 by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.12.2017 alongwith other petitioners but subsequently statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded then she levelled the allegation of rape and Section 376 has been added and again this writ petition has been filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out para no.3 of the supplementary affidavit, which is filed today that the victim was not medically examined.

¶9

Copy of the aforesaid order has been annexed in the writ petition by learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for quashing but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶11

Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and nature of the allegations, it is directed that the petitioner shall not be arrested in above mentioned case, till the submission of the police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. but he shall co-operate with the investigation of the case.

¶12

With the above direction this petition is finally disposed of.

¶13

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

¶14

Order Date :- 15.2.2018 AK Pandey

Narendra Kumar @ Bali v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narendra Kumar @ Bali 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sapna and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Anwar @ Anwarul HUDA and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Hari Singh Vs C.B.I, a.C.B., Ghaziabad

Nazneen Bano and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ram Patal Yadav and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mohd. Faizal Attari and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others