Dismissed

Neeraj Jadaun and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC12 Apr 2019CRLP/9594/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected the petitioners' plea to quash an FIR alleging cheating and criminal conspiracy under the IPC. The court found prima facie cognizable offences but directed that the petitioners shall not be arrested pending the police report under Section 173(2) CrPC.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash FIR refused; direction issued for non-arrest of petitioners pending police report under Section 173(2) CrPC subject to cooperation with investigation.

Neeraj Jadaun and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 46

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9594 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Neeraj Jadaun And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- M.P.S. Chauhan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J. Hon'ble Anil Kumar-IX,J.

¶5

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.G.A. for the State. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioners have invoked extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the FIR dated 06.03.2019 lodged by the respondent no. 3 in Case Crime No. 48 of 2019, under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Gonda, District- Aligarh.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the impugned first information report has been lodged by the respondent no. 2 containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against the petitioners with the ulterior intention of harassing them. He further 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 petitioners in the commission of the alleged crime and hence the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.

¶7

Per contra learned A.G.A. contended that the allegations made in the first information report cannot be aborted at this stage. The petitioners will have sufficient opportunity to rebut the allegations.

¶8

From perusal of the F.I.R., prima facie cognizable offences is made out at this stage against the petitioners, therefore, we do not find any cogent reason to quash the first information report. The prayer for quashing the first information report is refused.

¶9

However, in the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioners, it is directed that the petitioners shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case till the submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., subject to the restraint that he shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear as and when called upon to assist in the investigation.

¶10

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

¶11

Order Date :- 12.4.2019 Sharad/-

Neeraj Jadaun and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neeraj Jadaun and Another 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

State of U.P. Vs Ankit and 2 Ors.

Ishwari and Anr. Vs State of U.P.

Karishma and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ramsurat @ Rampratap Yadav and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

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