Partly allowed

Dansih (Minor) v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC13 Nov 2018CRLP/32405/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Writ Petition to quash F.I.R. alleging crimes under IPC and POCSO Act. Court refused quashing as prima facie cognizable offence existed but directed no arrest pending police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. with condition of cooperation.

What did the court decide?

FIR not quashed; petitioner not to be arrested till police report u/s 173(2) Cr.P.C. filed, subject to cooperation.

Dansih (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 4

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 32405 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Dansih (Minor) Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vikram Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to quash the impugned F.I.R. registered as Case Crime no. 197 of 2018, under Sections 354, 323, 506 I.P.C. R/W 7/8 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, P.S. Sarpataha, district-Jaunpur.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the prosecutrix Anjali Singh, in her statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C., copy whereof has been filed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition, has failed to nominate the petitioner Danish as an accused. He further submitted that apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned F.I.R. no evidence is forthcoming even prima facie indicating at the complicity of the petitioners in the commission of the alleged crime and hence the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. submitted that the impugned F.I.R. is not liable to be quashed on the basis of the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶9

From the perusal of the impugned F.I.R., it appears that on the basis of the allegations made therein prima-facie cognizable offence is made out. There is no scope of interfering in the F.I.R, therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned F.I.R. is refused.

¶10

However, considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and the nature of the allegations made in the F.I.R., it is directed that till the submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., the petitioner shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case subject to their extending full cooperation during investigation.

¶11

With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition is finally disposed of.

¶12

Order Date :- 13.11.2018 Shalini

Dansih (Minor) v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dansih (Minor) 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

Sumit Kapoor Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Mayank Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Santosh Mishra and 2 Others Vs State of U P and 4 Others

Rajendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Abhisekh Kumar Gupta and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others