Disposed

Vikrant and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC21 May 2019CRLP/4913/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of an FIR alleging marital discord and attempted murder. The High Court declined to quash the FIR due to disclosed cognizable offences but granted conditional liberty from arrest pending the submission of a police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., subject to cooperation in investigation.

What did the court decide?

Investigation to continue without arrest of petitioners till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., subject to their cooperation.

Vikrant and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 33

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 4913 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Vikrant And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Khalil 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 State-respondent nos. 1, 2 & 3; Sri Ajay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for respondent no. 4 and perused the record.

¶6

The instant petition seeks quashing of the FIR dated 08.01.2019 registered as Case Crime No. 22 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 307, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Sardhana, District Meerut.

¶7

Although the allegations made in the impugned First Information Report discloses commission of cognizable offences but the case of the petitioner is that the allegations have been levelled with a malafide intention just to harass the entire family of the husband of the victim and those allegations have no support from any injury report.

¶8

On 22.02.2019, we had required the learned A.G.A. to file counter affidavit and had also issued notice to the respondent no. 4 fixing 16.04.2019.

¶9

Sri A.K. Mishra, advocate, has put his appearance on behalf of respondent no. 4.

¶10

We have specifically put a question to Sri A.K. Mishra whether there is any injury report to support the allegations or not. To the aforesaid query, Sri A.K. Mishra stated that there is no injury report but the allegations made in the F.I.R. disclose commission of cognizable offences and that the allegations are true.

¶11

It is well settled that correctness of the allegations are not ordinarily to be tested in the writ jurisdiction, hence prayer of the petitioners to quash the F.I.R. cannot be accepted.

¶12

However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also that a Civil Case No. 12 of 2017 under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act had been filed by the husband in the year 2017, we deem it appropriate to dispose off this petition by providing that investigation shall continue and brought to its logical conclusion, but, subject to petitioners' co-operation in the investigation, the petitioners shall not be arrested till submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. in the aforesaid case.

¶13

Order Date :- 21.5.2019

¶14

Vibha Singh

Vikrant and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikrant and 4 Others 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

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

Kirti Prakash @ Gagan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

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

Hemant Rav Patel Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others