Dismissed¶¶11

Arpit Sharma and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC26 Nov 2020CRLP/12857/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition seeking mandamus against arrest and quashing of FIR under s.498A IPC and D.P. Act dismissed; alternate remedy of anticipatory bail available per notification dated 6.6.2019; allegations to be tested during investigation; contentions left open; Case Crime No. 103 of 2020, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Prayagraj; decided 26.11.2020.

What did the court decide?

None; dismissal is expressly without prejudice to the petitioner's right to apply for anticipatory bail. ¶¶11

Why is it important?

Arpit Sharma and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2020)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; dismissal is expressly without prejudice to the petitioner's right to apply for anticipatory bail.

¶¶11

Issue for consideration

Whether the FIR dated 8.9.2020 in Case Crime No. 103 of 2020 (ss. 498A, 323, 504, 506, 406, 313 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act) should be quashed on the ground that it was lodged on false/vexatious/mischievous allegations and no offence is made out. +1 more

¶¶7

Court's answer

The correctness of the allegations in the FIR would have to be tested on the basis of the materials collected during the course of investigation.

¶¶9

Ratio / Principle

In view of Government notification No.1058/79-V-1-19-1 (Ka)-20-2018 dated 6th June 2019, an alternate remedy is available to the petitioner to seek anticipatory bail.

¶¶9

Key takeaways

The Court deemed it appropriate to dismiss the writ petition without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to apply for anticipatory bail.ratio¶¶10
The contentions raised in the writ petition were not adjudicated and stand left open for the petitioner to raise at an appropriate stage in an appropriate proceeding, in accordance with law.ratio¶¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 12857 of 2020 (decided 26.11.2020) — Petitioners (Arpit Sharma and 3 others) sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to arrest the petitioner, and quashing of the FIR dated 8.9.2020 in Case Crime No. 103 of 2020 under sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 406, 313 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Prayagraj, alleging the FIR was lodged on false/vexatious/mischievous allegations. Held: the correctness of the allegations would have to be tested on the materials collected during investigation; by insertion of notification No.1058/79-V-1-19-1 (Ka)-20-2018 dated 6th June 2019 an alternate remedy of anticipatory bail is available to the petitioner. Writ petition dismissed without prejudice to the right to apply for anticipatory bail; contentions raised were left open to be raised at an appropriate stage in an appropriate proceeding.

Arpit Sharma and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

Arpit Sharma and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Zaki and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Saeed Ahmad and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shalini Tripathi @ Deepika Tripathi and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

Satyam Singh @ Satyam Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Beenu @ Ajay Pratap Singh and Another Vs State of U P and 2 Others