Disposed

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

Allahabad HC22 Apr 2019CRLP/9510/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged FIR under IPC Sections 452, 354, 323 seeking quashal on grounds of compromise. Court refused interlocutory disposal and directed Investigating Officer to verify compromise, record statements, and submit police report.

What did the court decide?

Ordered Investigating Officer to verify compromise and submit police report after recording statements.

Sadakat 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. - 9510 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Sadakat And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Syed Imran Ibrahim,Irshad Husain 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 and perused the record.

¶6

The instant petition seeks quashing of the FIR dated 03.09.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 617 of 2018, under Sections 452, 354, 323 I.P.C., Police Station Civil Lines, District Aligarh.

¶7

The allegation in the First Information Report, which has been lodged by the respondent no. 3, is that the accused entered the house of the informant, and outraged her modesty.

¶8

The First Information Report was registered not only for offence punishable under Sections 354 & 323 I.P.C. but also for offence punishable under Section 452 I.P.C.

¶9

The petitioners have filed this petition on the ground that the informant no longer wishes to pursue the case against the petitioners and, therefore, on the basis of compromise, the First Information Report may be quashed.

¶10

In matters where a compromise has taken place during the course of investigation, the investigating officer can record the statement of the persons concerned including the victim. In case no evidence is forthcoming for prosecuting the accused, the Investigating Officer may submit a closure report as per law. But, whether a compromise has taken place or not and whether the parties are willing to lead evidence or not is to be determined after ascertaining whether such compromise has indeed taken place or not and whether it is with free consent, that is no fraud, coercion or undue influence has been played upon the parties.

¶11

As these are questions of fact, we deem it appropriate to dispose off this petition by observing that the Investigating Officer of the case shall examine the aforesaid aspects,

¶12

after recording the statements, and submit police report as per law.

¶13

If, thereafter, the petitioners have any grievance, they would be at liberty to take recourse to appropriate remedy in appropriate jurisdiction.

¶14

O rder Date :- 22.4.2019 Vibha Singh

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sadakat 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

Sunny Yadav and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Jahid and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Madhu Sudan Mishra Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

Raghu Raj @ Bhola @ Raghu Raj Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Anshul Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others