Disposed

Anuj Kumar and 06 Others v. State of U.P. and 02 Others

Allahabad HC17 Apr 2018CRLP/9675/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court declined to quash an FIR under Section 498A IPC, finding cognizable offences appeared on its face. However, considering legal precedents, it granted a stay on the petitioners' arrest pending the police report, directing police to conclude investigation promptly.

What did the court decide?

FIR not quashed; stay granted on arrest of petitioners pending police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.

Anuj Kumar and 06 Others Vs State of U.P. and 02… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 51

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9675 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Anuj Kumar And 06 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 02 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Madhava Nand Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

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

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners 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. 232 of 2018, under Sections- 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC & 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S.- Shamli, district- Shamli.

¶7

This is second FIR in regard to the earlier FIR, the earlier writ petition is disposed of vide order dated 21.12.2017 which is annexed at page 33 of the writ petition.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that 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; it is no injury case ; entire family members have been implicated in the present case on the basis of general allegations; much reliance has been placed upon paragraph nos. 4, 13 and 14 to the affidavit accompanying the writ petition; 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.

¶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

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.

¶11

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

¶12

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.

¶13

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

¶14

Order Date :- 17.4.2018 Ujjawal

Anuj Kumar and 06 Others v. State of U.P. and 02 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anuj Kumar and 06 Others v. State of U.P. and 02 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

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.

Vikas Chaudhary Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Rekha and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Akhilesh Srivastava and 5 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.