Disposed

Praveen Katiyar and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC22 May 2019CRLP/19214/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition for quashing FIR under 498-A IPC dismissed on merits due to cognizable nature. Court allowed investigation to continue but stayed arrest of petitioners until police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. is submitted, subject to their cooperation.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; investigation to continue; no arrest of petitioners until submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., subject to cooperation.

Praveen Katiyar and 5 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. - 19214 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Praveen Katiyar And 5 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ghazala Bano Quadri 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 25.06.2018 registered as Case Crime No.0527 of 2018 at P.S. Naubasta, District Kanpur Nagar, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶7

On 19.07.2018 the matter was referred to the Mediation Centre for exploring possibitly of settlement between the parties.

¶8

The Mediation Centre initially reported that within time specified, deposit of Rs. 30,000/- was not made, as directed by order dated 19.07.2018.

¶9

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that later a time extension application was filed in which an order was passed on 31.08.2018 extending the time period to make deposit. It has been submitted that the period was extended and within that extended period, deposit was made, however, though Mediation was completed, no agreement could be arrived at.

¶10

The Mediation Centre has submitted a report dated 28.03.2019 that mediation was completed but no agreement could be arrived at between the parties.

¶11

In view of the above, we have proceeded to examine the matter on merits. A perusal of the first information report, indicates that it discloses commission of cognizable offence.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submitted that the allegations are not supported by any medical examination report and otherwise also the entire family of the husband has been implicated by levelling general allegations.

¶13

Be that as it may, as correctness of allegations would have to be tested on the basis of material collected during the course of investigation the prayer of the petitioners to quash the first information report cannot be accepted.

¶14

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, 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.

¶15

Order Date :- 22.5.2019 Md Faisal

Praveen Katiyar and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Praveen Katiyar and 5 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

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

Abbal Singh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Nekpal and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Navin Chaurasiya and Another Vs State of U.P. and 02 Others

Ajay Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others