Dismissed

Brahmanand Sahani @ Brahmanand v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC26 Apr 2019CRLP/11178/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court refused to quash the FIR but directed that the petitioner shall not be arrested under the case till the submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., provided he cooperates with the investigation and appears when called.

What did the court decide?

The prayer to quash the FIR is refused; the petitioner is directed not to be arrested till the submission of the police report under S. 173(2) Cr.P.C. subject to cooperation with the investigation.

Brahmanand Sahani @ Brahmanand Vs State of U.P. and 2… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 54

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11178 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Brahmanand Sahani @ Brahmanand Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Gautam,Mohd. Shamim Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

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

¶5

Heard Sri Mohd. Shamim, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has invoked extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. dated 29.03.2018, registered as Case Crime No. 278 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C., Police Station-Cantt., District-Gorakhpur.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned first information report has been lodged by the respondent no.3 Atul Kumar Baranwal containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against the petitioner with the ulterior intention of harassing him. 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 petitioner 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 petitioner 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 petitioner, 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 petitioner, it is directed that the petitioner 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 he 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.

¶13

Order Date :- 26.4.2019 Rahul.

Brahmanand Sahani @ Brahmanand v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Brahmanand Sahani @ Brahmanand 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pradeep Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sushil Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Ajay Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Prince Yadav and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others