Disposed

Rameshwar Singh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC10 Apr 2019CRLP/2846/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition seeking quashing of an FIR under Section 498-A IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act. The Court held that the FIR discloses cognizable offences and cannot be quashed but ordered that investigation continue while the petitioners remain suspended from arrest pending the police report.

What did the court decide?

Investigation to continue logically; petitioners not to be arrested till submission of police report under Section 173(2) CrPC, subject to their co-operation.

Rameshwar Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 33

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 2846 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Rameshwar Singh And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashwani Kumar Srivastava,Hemant Kumar Rai Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Vinod Kumar Singh Kushwaha

¶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 Vinod Kumar Singh Kushwaha for the respondents 4 and 5; and perused the record.

¶6

The instant petition seeks quashing of the first information report dated 11th November, 2018 registered as Case Crime No.0140 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, police station Dildar Nagar, district Ghazipur.

¶7

The allegations made in the impugned first information report, which has been lodged by the father of the victim, Priti Maurya, discloses commission of cognizable offence. However, it is claimed by the petitioners that the allegations are false and they have been levelled to exert pressure upon the petitioners. It is also claimed that there is no injury report in support of the prosecution case and that the allegations have been levelled only on account of matrimonial differences between the parties. It is claimed that the petitioner no.1, who is the husband of daughter of the respondent no.4, has instituted a petition for restitution of conjugal rights, which is pending before the Family Court, Ghazipur.

¶8

Learned counsel for the private respondents has submitted that an effort to amicably settle the dispute with the help of mediation centre was undertaken but failed.

¶9

Be that as it may, as the allegations made in the impugned first information report disclose commission of cognizable offences, the prayer of the petitioners to quash the first information report cannot be accepted. However, keeping in mind the nature of the allegations as also that there appears no injury report to support the prosecution 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.

¶10

Order Date :- 10.4.2019. Rks.

Rameshwar Singh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rameshwar Singh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 4 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

Chintoo @ Karan Murari and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Bhagwat Prasad Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shyam Narain Pandey Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mohan Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Arun Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sonu Pandey and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others