Disposed

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

Allahabad HC28 May 2019CRLP/14648/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Writ Petition seeking quashing of an FIR alleging sexual exploitation and false marriage promise. The court declined quashing but directed police to continue investigation. Petitioners were granted protection from arrest until the police report under Section 173(2) CrPC was submitted, provided they cooperate.

What did the court decide?

Investigation continued; arrest stayed pending submission of police report under Section 173(2) CrPC subject to petitioner's cooperation.

Rishi Kapoor and 2 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. - 14648 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Rishi Kapoor And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyawati,Bhupendra Pal Singh 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, 2 and 3; Sri Ashvni Mishra for respondent no.4; and perused the record.

¶6

The instant petition seeks quashing of the first information report dated 11th May, 2019 registered as Case Crime No.0206 of 2019, under Sections 376, 313, 323, 366, 342 and 506 IPC at Police Station Sasani Gate, District Aligarh.

¶7

The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the thrust of the allegation is that the victim was enticed away on the promise of marriage by petitioner no.1 and, thereafter, was sexually exploited. Later, it was found that the petitioner no.1 was already married and staying at her maternal house, who, later, returned back.

¶8

The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that from the allegations it appears that the petitioner no.1 had been already married and that during subsistence of his earlier marriage, he had kept the informant. It has been submitted that it does not appear to be a case where any offence punishable under Section 376 IPC has been committed. It has been submitted that by levelling false allegations, the entire family of the petitioner no.1 has also been implicated.

¶9

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

¶10

However, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the petition by providing that investigation of the above case shall continue and be brought to its logical conclusion but subject to the petitioners' co-operation in the investigation, they shall not be arrested till submission of police report under Section 173 (2) CrPC.

¶11

Order Date :- 28.5.2019.

¶12

Rks.

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rishi Kapoor and 2 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

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

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