The High Court declined to quash the FIR in a matrimonial dispute but issued a direction prohibiting the arrest of the petitioners until the police submit the charge sheet under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.
Direction that petitioners shall not be arrested till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9353 of 2018
Petitioner :- Updesh And 4 Ors. Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Devendra Pratap Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J. Hon'ble Mahboob Ali,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State.
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.0255 of 2018, under Sections- 498A, 323, 504 IPC & 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Karhal, District Mainpuri.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that there is a matrimonial dispute and husband is not a party; the present FIR 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.
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.
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.
However, 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 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.
With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 13.4.2018
T.S.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned F.I.R. under Sections 498A IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act should be quashed as containing false allegations in a matrimonial dispute.
Whether the petitioners should be protected from arrest until the submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
B.S. Joshi v. State of HaryanaReferred¶10
B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana; 2003(4) SCC 675 · Who else cites this
Rajesh Sharma and others v. State of U.P. and othersReferred¶10
Rajesh Sharma and others v. State of U.P. and others
Updesh And 4 Ors.
State Of U.P. And 3 Ors.
Vipin Sinha
Mahboob Ali
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
