Partly allowed

Shahanwaz and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC9 Apr 2018CRLP/8692/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing an 498A FIR. For male applicants, bail was contingent on surrender within 45 days. For female applicants, they were not to be arrested until the police report was filed under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

Male applicants granted 45 days to surrender and apply for bail; female applicants directed not to be arrested until police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. is filed.

Shahanwaz and 6 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. - 8692 of 2018 Petitioner :- Shahanwaz And 6 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ravi Sahu Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J. Hon'ble Ifaqat Ali Khan,J.

¶4

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

¶5

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the FIR registered as Crime No.24 of 2018 u/s 498A, 323,354, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 DP Act PS Colonganj District Kanpur Nagar.

¶6

As far as applicant no. 1,2,6 and 7 is concerned, they are gents and following order is being passed:

¶7

After hearing learned counsel for applicant no. 1,2,6 and 7 and learned AGA, this application is finally disposed of with a direction that if applicant no. 1,2,6 and 7 appear and surrender before the court below within 45 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P . For a period of 45 days from today or till the applicant no. 1,2,6 and 7 surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against applicant no. 1,2,6 and 7 . However, in case, applicant no. 1,2,6 and 7 do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶8

As far as applicant nos. 3 to 5 are concerned, they are ladies and following order is being passed:

¶9

Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties 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(s) no.3 to 5 shall not be arrested in the aforementioned case till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. However, petitioner(s) no. 3 to 5 shall participate and co-operate with the investigation and police authorities shall conclude the investigation as early as possible.

¶10

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

¶11

Order Date :- 9.4.2018 SP

Shahanwaz and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahanwaz and 6 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

Sunita and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shahjad and 03 Others Vs State of U.P. and 02 Others

Durgawati Shahni Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.