Disposed

Gajay Singh Jayant v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC17 Apr 2019CRLP/3469/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR under Section 306 IPC. The court held that investigation must continue due to unnatural death but stayed the petitioner's arrest pending the submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

Investigation ordered to continue to logical conclusion; arrest of petitioner stayed pending police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.

Gajay Singh Jayant Vs State of U.P. and 2… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 33

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 3469 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Gajay Singh Jayant Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Satish Chaturvedi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

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

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent nos.1, 2 & 3; and perused the record.

¶6

The instant petition seeks quashing of the FIR dated 01.02.2019 registered as Case Crime No.0089 of 2019, under Section 306 I.P.C., Police Station (Thana) Highway, District Mathura.

¶7

The allegation in the impugned First Information Report, which has been lodged by the respondent no. 3, who is father of the deceased is that the deceased was being harassed and was in a disturbed mental condition as a consequence of which he committed suicide. The First Information Report has been lodged against the Assistant General Manager of the State Bank, Chhata Branch where the deceased had been posted as a subordinate.

¶8

On 08.02.2019, after noticing the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner, following order was passed:-

¶9

"The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the deceased, who committed suicide, was an employee of the bank whose high ranking officer is the petitioner and, therefore, just to create pressure, the impugned first information report has been lodged. It has been submitted that even the suicide note does not level any specific allegation against the petitioner and it only discloses that the deceased was under stress.

¶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 petitioner in Case Crime No.0089 of 2019, under Section 306 IPC, Police Station Highway, District Mathura, shall remain stayed, subject to petitioner's cooperation in the investigation. It is made clear that this Court has not stayed the investigation of the aforesaid case. "

¶16

Pursuant to the above order, notice was issued to the respondent no. 3 fixing 17.04.2019. The office has submitted the report that notice was sent to the respondent no. 3 but neither acknowledgment nor undelivered cover has been received back. It appears that a short counter affidavit has been filed by the Investigating Officer disclosing that the matter is under investigation.

¶17

Considering that a person had died an unnatural death, the investigation would have to be brought to its logical conclusion, therefore we deem it appropriate to dispose off this petition by providing that investigation shall continue and be brought to its logical conclusion, but, subject to petitioner's co-operation in the investigation, the petitioner shall not be arrested till submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. in the aforesaid case.

¶18

In case an adverse police report is submitted against the petitioner, it shall be open to the petitioner to challenge the police report by taking recourse to appropriate remedy in appropriate jurisdiction.

¶19

O rder Date :- 17.4.2019 Vibha Singh

Gajay Singh Jayant v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gajay Singh Jayant 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

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

Shyamveer Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Arti Dixit Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sonam Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vijay Kumar and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rajendra Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others