Dismissed

Devendra Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC26 Jun 2019CRLP/16577/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected the prayer to quash the FIR against the petitioner, finding prima facie cognizable offences. However, the court directed no arrest before the police report under Section 173(2) CrPC, cooperation with investigation, and no unauthorized foreign travel.

What did the court decide?

No arrest of the petitioner until submission of police report under Section 173(2) CrPC, subject to cooperation; no leaving the country without permission of the Chief Judicial Magistrate.

Devendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 46

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 16577 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Devendra Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamlesh Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J. Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel Shri Mohd. Salim holding brief of Sri Swatashwa Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for the complainant-respondent No. 4 and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has invoked extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the FIR dated 5.6.2019 registered as Case Crime No. 297 of 2019, under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120B and 34 IPC, Police Station Nawabad, District Jhansi.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned first information report has been lodged by the respondent no. 4 containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against the petitioner with the ulterior intention of harassing him. He further submitted that apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned F.I.R. no evidence is forthcoming even prima facie indicating at the complicity of the petitioner in the commission of the alleged crime and hence the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.

¶8

Per contra learned A.G.A. contended that the allegations made in the first information report cannot be aborted at this stage. The petitioner will have sufficient opportunity to rebut the allegations.

¶9

From perusal of the F.I.R. prima facie cognizable offences is made out at this stage against the petitioner, therefore, we do not find any cogent reason to quash the first information report. The prayer for quashing the first information report is refused.

¶10

However, in the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner, it is directed that the petitioner shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case till the submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., subject to the restraint that he shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear as and when called upon to assist in the investigation.

¶11

It is further directed that the petitioner will not leave the country without permission of the Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

¶12

With the above direction, this petition is finally disposed of.

¶13

Order Date :- 26.6.2019 sfa/

Devendra Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devendra Kumar 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

Neha Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ramsaran Vs State of U P and Another

Luxman Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Nasreen Jahan Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sushil Tiwari and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Sangita and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others