Dismissed

Amit Singh @ Amit Pratap Singh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC29 Apr 2019CRLP/11240/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed a writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR alleging serious offences. Finding sufficient material to make out a cognizable offence, the refusal of the petitioner's prayer for quashing, while permitting a future bail application.

What did the court decide?

Refusal to quash the FIR; liberty to apply for bail if petitioners appear within 30 days.

Amit Singh @ Amit Pratap Singh and 3 Others Vs State of… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 54

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11240 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Amit Singh @ Amit Pratap Singh And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajeev Upadhyay Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

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

¶5

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

¶6

The relief sought by means of this petition is for quashing of the FIR dated 15.4.2019 registered as Case Crime No.162 of 2019 under Sections 376D/342/323/506 IPC, Police Station Saurikh, District Kannauj.

¶7

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are unnecessarily being harassed by the police personnel. The first information report has been lodged against the petitioners on false allegations. Initially the respondent no.4 approached before another Bench of this court by filing a Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 6270 of 2019 in which it was alleged that she has performed marriage with Veeru Pratap Singh on 14.2.2019. The said writ petition was dismissed as not pressed with liberty to file fresh petition vide order dated 5.3.2019. The respondent no.4 performed marriage with Avanish and filed a Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 7785 of 2019. The said writ petition was disposed of with some directions vide order dated 7.3.2019. The present first information report has been lodged against the petitioners with false and uncorroborated allegations. There is no evidence connecting the petitioners with the said offence. There is material inconsistency in the prosecution version. The life and liberty of the petitioners cannot be downsized on the basis of false allegations hence the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed.

¶8

Per contra learned contended that there is sufficient material showing the complicity of the petitioners in the commission of said offence. The allegations made in the first information report cannot be aborted at this stage.The respondent no.4 has narrated her agony and pain in a very natural manner. There is no exaggeration in the prosecution version.

¶9

From the perusal of the FIR, prima facie it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against the petitioners . No cogent and convincing reason has been put forth by the learned counsel for the petitioners prompting this Court to quash the FIR. The petitioner are involved in a very serious offence. This Court does not find any justifiable ground for quashing the F.I.R. or staying the arrest of the petitioners hence the prayer for quashing the FIR or staying the arrest of the petitioners is refused.

¶10

The writ petition does not have any substance and is accordingly dismissed.

¶11

However, it is provided that if the petitioners appear or surrender before

¶12

the Court concerned within thirty days from today and apply for bail in the aforesaid case, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided by the court below in accordance with law.

¶13

Order Date :- 29.4.2019 Naim

Amit Singh @ Amit Pratap Singh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Singh @ Amit Pratap Singh and 3 Others 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

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

Varun Arora and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bheem Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

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