Disposed

Naveen and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC28 Mar 2018CRLP/7503/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal miscellaneous writ petition filed for quashing FIR alleging dowry harassment. Court did not quash FIR but directed that petitioners shall not be arrested till submission of police report, requiring them to cooperate with investigation.

What did the court decide?

Directed that petitioners shall not be arrested till submission of police report; liable to cooperate with investigation.

Naveen and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 1 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7503 of 2018 Petitioner :- Naveen And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Jawahir Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶2

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

¶3

Heard Sri Jawahir Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Jitendra Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned FIR as well as material brought on record.

¶4

This petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to quash the FIR dated 30.1.2018 registered as Case Crime No.43 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Ghaziabad.

¶5

It has been submitted by the petitioner that the marriage between the petitioner no.1and respondent no.3 was solemnized in the year 2014. He further submitted that the impugned FIR has been lodged by the respondent no.3 roping in the entire family of her husband, petitioner no.1 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, hence the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed.

¶6

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

¶7

Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and nature of the allegations and the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Rajesh Sharma and others Vs. State of U.P. and another in Criminal Appeal No.1265 of 2017 decided on 27.7.2017 , it is directed that the petitioners shall not be arrested in above mentioned case, till the submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. but they shall co-operate with the investigation of the case.

¶8

With the above direction, this petition is finally disposed of.

¶9

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

¶10

Order Date :- 28.3.2018/NS

Naveen and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naveen and 3 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

Vandana Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Barkat Ali and 6 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Smt. Preeti and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and 4 Ors.

Shahzad Ali and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

jitendra bhatt @ ratan bhatt @ jitendra sharma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Renu Gupta and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others