Dismissed

Ilu Kumar @ Ravi Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC14 Oct 2020CRLP/10955/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This disposal in a criminal writ petition dismissed the plea seeking quashing of an FIR or grant of anticipatory bail. The court observed that the correctness of allegations must be tested via investigation and that an alternate remedy for bail exists.

What did the court decide?

Writ of mandamus directing not to arrest the petitioners and prayer for quashing the impugned FIR were dismissed.

Ilu Kumar @ Ravi Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 43

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10955 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Ilu Kumar @ Ravi Kumar And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Jai Prakash Prasad,Rakesh Yadav

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J. Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Jai Prakash Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.G.A.

¶7

This writ petition has been filed, seeking a writ of mandamus, directing the respondent concerned, not to arrest the petitioners, with a further prayer for quashing the impugned FIR dated 21.08.2020 registered as case crime no.0335 of 2020, under Sections-354, 452, 323, 506 IPC and 7/8 POCSO Act, 2012, Police StationCharthawal, District-Muzaffar Nagar.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that FIR has been lodged on false / vexatious / mischievous allegations, no offences are made out, FIR be quashed.

¶9

Learned AGA has opposed the submission.

¶10

The correctness of the allegations would have to be tested on the basis of the materials collected during the course of investigation as by insertion of notification No.1058/79-V-1-19-1 (Ka)-20-2018 dated 6th June 2019, an alternate remedy is available to the petitioners to seek for an anticipatory bail/bail as they may be advised.

¶11

The writ petition is dismissed .

¶12

It is made clear that we have not adjudicated the contentions raised which are left open for the petitioners to raise at an appropriate stage in an appropriate proceeding, in accordance with law.

¶13

The party shall file a computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioner alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (s) (preferably

¶14

Aadhar Card).

¶15

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶16

Order Date :- 14.10.2020 Ashutosh

¶17

Digitally signed by Justice Pankaj Digitally signed by Justice Vivek Naqvi Agarwal Date: 2020.10.14 16:45:50 IST Date: 2020.10.14 16:47:52 IST Reason: Document Owner Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Allahabad

Ilu Kumar @ Ravi Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ilu Kumar @ Ravi Kumar and Another 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

Abbas Ali Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Monika Masih Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Dal Chand Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Lovely and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Raj Kumar Bhatnagar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

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