Dismissed

Pappu and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC19 Apr 2019CRLP/10359/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioners filed a writ petition to quash an FIR alleging coercions. The Court rejected the prayer to quash the FIR as prima facie cognizable offences were made out. However, the Court granted a direction that the petitioners shall not be arrested until the submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

Direction that petitioners shall not be arrested till submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.

Pappu and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 46

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10359 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Pappu And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Adarsh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J. Hon'ble Anil Kumar-IX,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Adarsh Kuma r, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

By means of the present writ petition, the petitioners have invoked extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. dated 15.03.2019 , registered as Case Crime No. 209 of 2019, under Sections 386, 323, 504, 307 & 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Chakeri, District-Kanpur Nagar.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the impugned first information report has been lodged by the respondent no.3 Lalita Chauhan containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against the petitioners with the ulterior intention of harassing them. He further submitted that 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 the alleged crime and hence the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.

¶8

Per contra learned A.G.A. contended that the allegations made in the first information report cannot be aborted at this stage. The petitioners will have sufficient opportunity to rebut the allegations.

¶9

From perusal of the F.I.R., prima facie cognizable offences is made out at this stage against the petitioners, therefore, we do

¶10

not find any cogent reason to quash the first information report. The prayer for quashing the first information report is refused.

¶11

However, in the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioners, it is directed that the petitioners shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case till the submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., subject to the restraint that they shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear as and when called upon to assist in the investigation.

¶12

With the above direction, this petition is finally disposed of . Order Date :- 19.4.2019 Ashutosh Pandey

Pappu and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pappu 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

Minhaj and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ravi Shankar Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Sugriv Ram Yadav and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rajan and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ayyub Hafiz @ Jamani and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Dhiresh @ Nate Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others