Remanded

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

Allahabad HC10 Apr 2019CRLP/3004/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of an FIR for cheating and forgery. The court refused to quash the FIR but ordered the investigation to continue pending the submission of the police report without arresting the petitioners.

What did the court decide?

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

Arun Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 33

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 3004 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Arun Kumar And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajendra Prasad Tiwari,Smt Alpana Tiwari,Vinay Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J. Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners; the learned A.G.A. for the respondents 1 to 3; and perused the record.

¶6

The instant petition seeks quashing of the first information report dated 11.05.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 0291 of 2018 at P.S. Karvi Kotwali Nagar, District Chitrakoot, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C.

¶7

The allegation in the impugned first information report, which has been lodged by the Lekhpal of the village concerned, is that an agreement for sale has been executed in respect of public property.

¶8

The petitioners, who are marginal witnesses of the agreement for sale, have come before us by claiming that the agreement for sale does not disclose the plot number which may put a marginal witness on guard that the proposed agreement for sale is in respect of Govt./public land/property;and apart from that a marginal witness of the agreement would not be liable for offences punishable under Sections 419 and 420 I.P.C. and in so far as offences punishable under Sections 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C. are concerned, as there is no creation of false document within the meaning of section 464 of Indian Penal Code, they are not made out.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has pointed out that since the agreement is in respect of public property and it is well settled that first information report need not be an encyclopedia of all the facts and allegations, it is always open for the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter and find out whether there is any illegal occupation of public property or not and therefore it would not be appropriate for us to quash the impugned first information report or to interfere with the investigation, at this stage.

¶10

Be that as it may, we deem it appropriate to dispose off this petition by providing that the investigation of the case shall continue and be brought to its logical conclusion but, subject to petitioners' co-operation in the investigation, the petitioners shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case, till submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C.

¶11

Order Date :- 10.4.2019 Sunil Kr Tiwari

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Kumar and Another 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

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

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

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