Disposed

Shubham Yadav v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC12 Apr 2019CRLP/9274/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court in this criminal miscellaneous writ petition sought quashing of an F.I.R. under Section 307 IPC. It held that while the FIR could not be quashed, the petitioner is directed not to be arrested until the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. is submitted, while participating in the investigation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner not to be arrested until police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. is submitted; investigation to conclude within three months.

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

¶1

Court No. - 39

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9274 of 2019 Petitioner :- Shubham Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vikrant Rana,Ramesh Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Vikrant Rana, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶5

This writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the impugned F. I. R. dated 20.2.2019 registered as Case Crime No. 114 of 2019 under Section 307, IPC, Police Station Kotwali District Jaunpur.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged by the complainant respondent containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against the petitioners with intention to harass him. It is also submitted that apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned F.I.R., no evidence is forthcoming even prima facie indicating at the complicity of the petitioner in the commission of alleged offence and hence the impugned F.I.R. which is a bundle of lies and motivated by malice, is liable to be quashed.

¶7

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the impugned F. I. R., it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out, hence the impugned F.I.R. is not liable to be quashed.

¶8

Having heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned first information as well as the other material brought on record, we are not inclined to quash the impugned F.I.R.

¶9

However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, we dispose of this writ petition with the direction that the petitioner shall not be arrested in the aforementioned case till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. However, petitioner shall participate and co-operate with the investigation and police authorities shall conclude the investigation within three months from the date of production of certified copy of the order.

¶10

Order Date :- 12.4.2019

¶11

samz

Shubham Yadav v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shubham Yadav 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Kanta Bakshi Vs State of U.P. and Others

M/S Mritu Pashu Shav Chhedan Audhyogik Utpadan and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kanpur Dehat Eint Nirmata Samiti and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru Principal Secy. Labour and Others

Sandeep Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Kripal Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Land Management Committee Gram Arshadpurblock Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others