Disposed

Salman and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC28 May 2019CRLP/14590/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court rejected the prayer to quash an FIR involving sexual harassment and assault allegations. Instead, it directed that the investigation continue without arresting the petitioners until the police submit their report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., provided the petitioners cooperate.

What did the court decide?

Investigation to continue; petitioners not to be arrested till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., subject to their cooperation.

Salman and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 33

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 14590 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Salman And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Faya Nath Dubey,Bansh Raj Mishra 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 A.G.A. for the respondents 1, 2 and 3; and perused the record.

¶6

The instant petition seeks quashing of the first information report dated 04.02.2019 registered as Case Crime No.16 of 2019, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 354, 376, 307 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Meerut.

¶7

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that although the allegations do disclose commission of various cognizable offences but the fact of the matter is that the impugned first information report implicated all the members of the family of the husband. Father-in-law has been implicated by levelling allegation that he has been sexually harassing the victim. The brother-in-law (Jeth) has been implicated by levelling allegation of sexual assault of which there is no support from any medical evidence; and allegations have also been levelled that an attempt was made to strangulate her with her Dupatta of which there is no medical corroboration.

¶8

It has been submitted that the victim had been pressurizing her husband to stay separate and therefore just to exert pressure, on legal advice, various false allegations have been levelled which have no substance. It has been pointed out that the allegation about sexual assault is against the Jeth and the alleged incident is stated to have occurred on 19.01.2019 during day time, whereas the first information report has been lodged on 04.02.2019.

¶9

Be that as it may, as correctness of the allegations are not, ordinarily, to be tested in the writ petition, the prayer of the petitioners to quash the first information report cannot be accepted.

¶10

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

¶11

Order Date :- 28.5.2019 AKShukla/-

Salman and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Salman and 4 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramchandra Chaurasia and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rajaram Shah and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Jai Dayal Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sajul Bhatia and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rishi Kapoor and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Surekha Mehra and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others