Partly allowed

Gagiya and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC2 May 2019CRLP/11618/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR under various IPC sections, the High Court dismissed the petition for most petitioners but directed no arrest for the petitioner lady pending the police report under Section 173(2) CrPC.

What did the court decide?

Investigation against petitioner lady to continue without arrest pending police report; petition dismissed against other petitioners.

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

¶1

Court No. - 33

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11618 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Gagiya And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Manohar Kashyap Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J. Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners; learned AGA for respondents 1 and 2; and perused the record.

¶6

The instant petition seeks quashing of the First Information Report dated 3rd April, 2019 registered as Case Crime No.73 of 2019, under Sections 147, 149, 504, 323, 427, 452, 436, 506 and 109 IPC at Police Station Nandganj, District Ghazipur.

¶7

The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that a large mass of persons, 18 in number, have been implicated by levelling general allegations and otherwise also the incident did not occur in the manner in which it is alleged and, in fact, another version of the incident has been registered as Case Crime No.0072 of 2019 for offence punishable under Section 34/307 IPC.

¶8

A perusal of the first information report would reveal that it discloses commission of cognizable offences and persons have received injuries and property has also been destroyed.

¶9

Under the circumstances, on the grounds taken, the prayer of the petitioners to quash the first information report cannot be quashed. However, considering that the petitioner no.1 is a lady and there appears no specific allegation against her, we deem it appropriate to dispose off this petition by providing that in so far as petitioner no.1 (Gagiya) is concerned, the investigation as against her would continue and be brought to its logical conclusion but, subject to her cooperation in the investigation, she shall not be arrested till submission of police report under Section 173(2) CrPC. In so far as the petitioners 2 and 3, namely, Videshi and Rajesh are concerned, as the first information report discloses commission of cognizable offences, their petition stands dismissed.

¶10

The petition stands disposed off.

¶11

Order Date :- 2.5.2019. Rks.

Gagiya and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gagiya and 2 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

Mohd Nasir and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Khursheed and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

Sunil Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mitthu @ Arjun @ Fauzi Yadav (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Harihar Prasad Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others