Quashed

Mulayam Singh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC5 Apr 2018CRLP/8485/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court declined to quash an F.I.R. registered under Section 306 IPC alleging suicide by instigation. However, the petitioners were ordered not to be arrested until the submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., provided they cooperate with the investigation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners shall not be arrested till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. Petitioners shall cooperate with investigation.

Mulayam Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 51

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8485 of 2018 Petitioner :- Mulayam Singh And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶3

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

¶4

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

¶5

This writ petition has been filed with the prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F. I. R. which has been registered as Case Crime No. 55 of 2018, under Section- 306 IPC, P.S.- Bela, District- Auraiya.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the husband is not a party; the first information report has been lodged by the father-in-law on the basis of suspicion; marriage is of 11 years old; four children have born on account of said wedlock; as per the doctor's report it appears that the deceased has consumed some mosquito repellent; it was the husband, who had brought the deceased to the hospital. The impugned first information report has been lodged by the complainant-respondent containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against the petitioners with the ulterior intention of harassing the petitioners; entire family members have been implicated in the present case on the basis of general allegations; 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 alleged offence and hence the impugned F.I.R. which is a bundle of lies and motivated by malice, is liable to be quashed

¶7

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the impugned F. I. R., it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out, hence the impugned F.I.R. is not liable to be quashed.

¶8

Having heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned first information as well as the other material brought on record, we are not inclined to quash the impugned F.I.R.

¶9

However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties , we dispose of this writ petition with the direction that the petitioners shall not be arrested in the aforementioned case till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. However, petitioners shall participate and co-operate with the investigation and the police authorities are directed to conclude the investigation as early as possible.

¶10

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

¶11

Order Date :- 5.4.2018 Radhika

Mulayam Singh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mulayam Singh 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pulkit Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mahipal Sharma and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Prashant Kumar and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Pushpa Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Jameel Ahmad and 6 Others Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Balakdas and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.