Disposed

Indu Devi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC8 Mar 2019CRLP/6251/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court declined to quash an FIR alleging cheating and forgery regarding a land dispute. The court observed the dispute is civil in nature but directed that investigation proceed without arresting the petitioner until the police report is submitted under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., provided full co-operation.

What did the court decide?

Investigation to proceed; petitioner not to be arrested till submission of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. report.

Indu Devi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 43

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 6251 of 2019 Petitioner :- Indu Devi Respondent :- State of U.P. and 3 others Counsel for Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Keshari,Beerendra Singh Pal Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Sudhir Kumar Shukla

¶3

Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J. Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Beerendra Singh Pal, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. A.N. Mulla, learned A.G.A. Sri Sudhir Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the informant.

¶5

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 14.1.2019 registered as Case Crime No. 0013 of 2019 under section 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C, P.S. Bairia District Ballia.

¶6

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that dispute, if any, is of civil nature which arose for the first time in 2003 when the grandmother of respondent no. 4 executed a sale deed of the land in dispute in favour of other person, the petitioner is bonafide purchaser, who purchased the land from one Santosh Kumar Singh, whose name was recorded in the revenue record. Santosh Kumar Singh (vendor) had purchased land from one Ram Awadh and latter had purchased the land from grandmother of the respondent no.4, F.I.R. be quashed.

¶7

Per contra learned A.G.A, submitted that from the perusal of the impugned F.I.R, and on the basis of the allegations made therein, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is disclosed against the petitioner.

¶8

After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the impugned F.I.R, we are not inclined to quash the same.

¶9

However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we direct that investigation of the aforesaid case shall go on but the petitioner shall not be arrested till the submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C, subject to their extending full co-operation during investigation.

¶10

With the aforesaid direction, this petition is finally disposed of.

¶11

Order Date :- 8.3.2019 Ram Murti

Indu Devi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indu Devi 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh Kumar Singh @ Rajesh Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ravind and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shiv Singh Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rajkumari Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sri Lal Patel and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Habib Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others