Partly allowed

Lalit Chaturvedi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC9 May 2019CRLP/12536/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous writ petition for quashing an FIR under Sections 406, 420 IPC alleging cheating and criminal breach of trust, the court denied immediate quashing as dishonest intention must be ascertained via investigation. The petitioners were not arrested pending the police report under Section 173(2) CrPC provided they cooperate.

What did the court decide?

Protection from arrest granted pending submission of police report under Section 173(2) CrPC, subject to cooperation in investigation.

Lalit Chaturvedi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 33

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 12536 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Lalit Chaturvedi And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sati Shanker Tripathi,A.K. Mishra. Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Indresh Kumar Mishra,Kundan Rai

¶4

Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J.

¶5

Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the respondent nos. 1 and 2, Sri Kundan Rai, learned counsel for the respondent no.3; and perused the record.

¶7

The instant petition has been filed to quash the F.I.R. dated 12.4.2019 registered as case crime No. 312 of 2019 under Section 406, 420, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Kotwali, District - Mathura.

¶8

The allegation in the impugned first information report is that informant had supplied goods to the accused in respect of which part payment was made but for the remaining amount though promise was made but payment was not made. It has been submitted that when informant demanded payment, he was threatened by the accused.

¶9

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that even if the allegations are accepted as correct it appears to be a civil dispute between the parties, therefore, offence punishable under Section 406, 420 I.P.C. would not be made out.

¶10

Be that as it may, as it would have to be ascertained whether the accused had dishonest intention from the very beginning on the basis of material collected during the course of the investigation, the prayer of the petitioners to quash the first information report cannot be accepted.

¶11

However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it appropriate to dispose off this petition by providing that the investigation shall continue and be brought to its logical conclusion but the petitioners shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. provided they cooperate in the investigation.

¶12

Order Date :- 9.5.2019

¶13

A. Pt. Singh

Lalit Chaturvedi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalit Chaturvedi 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Atul Rai Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vinod Bihari Lal Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Mohd. Jalauddin Khan and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Abhishek @ Monu Srivastava and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Javed Akhtar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others