Petitioners sought quashing of FIR under Sections 376D, 506 IPC alleging false charges. Court declined quashing but directed non-arrest until police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.
Petitioners directed not to be arrested till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.; police to complete investigation within three months.
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. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 2083 of 2019
Petitioner :- Javed And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Ashraf Abbasi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J. Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A. G. A. for the State.
This writ petition has been filed with the prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F. I. R. which has been registered as Case Crime No. 156 of 2018, under Sections 376D, 506 IPC, P.S. Holagarh, District Allahabad.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the impugned first information report has been lodged by complainant containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against the petitioners with the ulterior intention of harassing petitioners; petitioners have been implicated on the basis of general allegation; the first information report is much delayed (18 months); much reliance has been placed to the averments made in paragraph nos. 5 and 6 of the writ petition; reliance has also been placed on the order passed in the case of co-accused, copy of which has been annexed on page 22 of the writ petition; 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 petitioners in the commission of alleged offence and hence the impugned F. I. R. which is a bundle of lies and motivated by malice, is liable to be quashed.
Per contra, learned A. G. A. has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the impugned F. I. R., it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out, hence the impugned F. I. R. is not liable to be quashed.
After having heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties present and perused the impugned first information as well as the other material brought on record, we are not inclined to quash the impugned F. I. R.
However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of
the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, we dispose of this writ petition with the direction that the petitioners shall not be arrested in the aforementioned case till submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., however, petitioners shall participate and co-operate with the investigation and the police authorities are directed to complete the investigation as early as possible, preferably within three months from the date of production of certified copy of the order.
Order Date :- 24.1.2019 Mini
2 issues framed by the court
Whether impugned FIR lodged under Sections 376D and 506 IPC is liable to be quashed.
Whether petitioners shall be arrested pending investigation.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Javed
Another
State Of U.P.
Vipin Sinha
Ajit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
