Dismissed

Usaman @ Pappu v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC16 Apr 2018CRLP/9531/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed a writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR alleging offences under IPC and POCSO. Finding no case for quashing, the Court directed that if the petitioner surrenders and applies for bail, the request shall be considered expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the impugned FIR dismissed. Direction to consider bail prayer expeditiously if petitioner surrenders.

Usaman @ Pappu Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 51

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9531 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Usaman @ Pappu Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amrendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

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

¶5

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

¶6

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. 282/2014 under Section- 363, 366, 376(2) Jha IPC & 3/4 POCSO Act P.S.- Manjhanpur district- Kaushambi.

¶7

We have perused the FIR.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submitted that the impugned first information report has been lodged by the complainant-respondent containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against the petitioner(s) with the ulterior intention of harassing the petitioners; 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 petitioner(s) 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.

¶9

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.

¶10

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the averments as made in the instant writ petition, the Court is of the opinion that no case for quashing of the FIR is made out.

¶11

However, it is directed that in case, petitioner appears and surrenders before the court below and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously.

¶12

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

¶13

Order Date :- 16.4.2018

¶14

Anand

Usaman @ Pappu v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Usaman @ Pappu v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Karishma and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Imran Khan and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Updesh and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Km. Nagma Vs State of U.P. and 6 Ors.

Atish Singh and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Smt. Basanti Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.