Dismissed

Jaggilal @ Jagdish and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC17 Apr 2019CRLP/9747/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed to quash an FIR alleging attempt to murder and assault. The Court held that a cognizable offence was made out supported by medical evidence. The petition was dismissed, and bail was granted if sought within thirty days.

What did the court decide?

Petition for quashing of FIR dismissed; bail prayer to be considered if application made within thirty days.

Jaggilal @ Jagdish and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 46

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9747 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Jaggilal @ Jagdish And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Arun Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

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

¶5

Heard Sri Arun Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

By means of the present writ petition, the petitioners have invoked extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. dated 31.12.2018, registered as Case Crime No. 422 of 2018 under Sections 307 and 323 I.P.C., Police Station-Bithoor, District-Kanpur Nagar.

¶7

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are being unnecessarily harassed on the basis of false allegations made against them while prima facie no cognizable offence is made out pursuant to the F.I.R. lodged by the respondent no.4 Shiva. Hence the F.I.R. deserves to be quashed.

¶8

In compliance of the order of this Court dated 15.04.2019, today the learned A.G.A. has supplied the injury report of the complainant Shiva, the same is taken on record.

¶9

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.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has further submitted that the complainant

¶11

had sustained injury over the chest which is fully corroborated by the medical report. Hence the involvement of the petitioner in the crime is fully supported by the medical report.

¶12

From the perusal of the F.I.R., prima facie it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against the petitioners. The petitioners are involved in the serious offences hence no ground exists for quashing of the F.I.R. or staying the arrest of the petitioners. The prayer for quashing the F.I.R. is refused.

¶13

The petition is accordingly dismissed .

¶14

However, it is provided that if the petitioners appear or surrender before the Court concerned within thirty days from today and apply for bail in the aforesaid case, their prayer for bail shall be considered by the court below expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶15

Order Date :- 17.4.2019

¶16

Rahul.

Jaggilal @ Jagdish and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaggilal @ Jagdish and 3 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

Laxman Singh @ Lakhan Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dipu Alias Hemant Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Piyush Sharma and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sukhbiri and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

Ravi Shankar Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others