Disposed

Khursheed and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC1 May 2019CRLP/3188/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a quashing petition regarding an FIR alleging theft and other offences. It ordered that the investigation continue but stayed the arrest of petitioners pending the filing of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., provided they cooperate with the investigation.

What did the court decide?

Stayed arrest of petitioners subject to cooperation in investigation until police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. is filed; investigation continued.

Khursheed and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 33

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 3188 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Khursheed And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Irfan 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 and 2; and perused the record.

¶6

The instant petition seeks quashing of the first information report dated 16.12.2018 registered as Case Crime No.814 of 2018, under Sections 380, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Tanda, District Rampur.

¶7

The contention of the petitioner's counsel is that though the allegations disclose commission of cognizable offence but the case of the petitioners stands on different footing than that of co-accused Nazish. It has been submitted that the petitioners have been implicated just to exert pressure on the petitioners.

¶8

After considering the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners, on 07.02.2019, following order was passed:-

¶9

"The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that insofar as the allegation in respect of theft is concerned, that allegation is specifically against co-accused Nazish, who is brother of the petitioners, with whom the informant, admittedly, had illicit relation. It has been stated that so far as the other allegations are concerned, they have been added for the purpose of exerting pressure on the family of Nazish.

¶10

Matter requires consideration.

¶11

Learned AGA has accepted notice on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 and 2.

¶12

Let notice be issued to the respondent no. 3 fixing 17.04.2019.

¶13

List on 17.04.2019.

¶14

By the next date, the respondents shall file their respective counter affidavits.

¶15

Till the next date of listing or till the submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., whichever is earlier, the arrest of the petitioners in Case Crime No. 0814 of 2018, under Sections 380, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Tanda, District Rampur, shall remain stayed, subject to petitioners' cooperation in the investigation.

¶16

It is made clear that this Court has not stayed the investigation of the aforesaid case."

¶17

The office has submitted a report that the petitioners have not taken steps to serve the respondent no.3.

¶18

However, a short counter affidavit has been filed by the Staterespondents. In paragraph 8 of the short counter affidavit, it is stated that police report has been submitted after investigation in Case Crime No.161 of 2016. It has been stated in paragraph 9 of the short counter affidavit that in so far as the present case is concerned, the investigation is pending.

¶19

It has not been specifically stated in the counter affidavit that there is allegation of theft against all the accused and not against Nazish only, as claimed by the petitioners.

¶20

In view of the above, 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.

¶21

It is made clear that the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation as and when required by the Investigating Officer.

¶22

Order Date :- 1.5.2019 AKShukla/-

Khursheed and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Khursheed and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 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

Sangeeta Pandey Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Brahmanand Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mahesh Chandra @ Mahesh Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohd Nasir and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

Dhirendra Kumar Tiwari and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others