Petitioner withdrew the criminal miscellaneous writ petition requesting quashing of FIR instead, with liberty to file anticipatory bail application.
Petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file anticipatory bail application.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 44
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 17834 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sachin And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anand Pati Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Maohammd Nadeem
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard Sri Sachidanand Prajapati, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Anand Pati Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Mohd. Nadeem, learned counsel for the private respondent and Sri A.R. Chaurasia, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
This petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. dated 07.06.2019 registered as case crime no. 386 of 2019, under section 507 I.P.C. and Section 66 of the Information Technology Act, police station Kotwali, District Kannauj.
Learned counsel for the petitioner/s submits that he is not pressing this petition so far as it relates to quashing of impugned FIR. He further submits that in view of the notification No.1058/79-V-1-19-1 (Ka)-202018 dated 6th June 2019, provisions of anticipatory bail have been made applicable in the State of Uttar Pradesh and, therefore, the petitioner/s may be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to file an application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. before the competent Court.
Counsel for the petitioner/s further submits that Registry may be directed to return certified copy of the F.I.R.
Learned State Counsel has no objection to this proposition.
The petition is, accordingly, dismissed, as withdrawn, with the aforesaid liberty.
Needless to state that in the eventuality of filing any such application by the petitioner/s, the same would be decided in accordance with law.
Registry is directed to return the certified copy of the FIR to the counsel for the petitioner/s after accepting xerox copy of the same.
(Raj Beer Singh, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
Order Date :- 26.7.2019 A. Tripathi
Sachin And 3 Others
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Ramesh Sinha
Raj Beer Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
