Dismissed

Nasimuddin and 3 Others v. State of U P and 3 Others

Allahabad HC14 Dec 2020CRLP/14694/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge dismissed the petition seeking quashing of an FIR alleging setting up of a forged nikahnama. The court held that the petitioners, as witnesses to the fabricated document, fall within the same category as a previously dismissed petition and thus their petition is rejected without prejudice to bail rights.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed without prejudice to the right of petitioner to apply for bail.

Nasimuddin and 3 Others Vs State of U P and 3 Others — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 48

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 14694 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Nasimuddin And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rahul Saxena,Azhar Ahmad Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners; learned A.G.A. for the respondents 1, 2 and 3; and perused the record.

¶6

The instant petition seeks quashing of the first information report dated 12.09.2020 registered as Case Crime No.386 of 2020, under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC at P.S. Didauli, District Amroha.

¶7

The allegation in the impugned first information report is that Nasreen Begum who is already married to one Yasin Ahmad, who lives in Saudi Arbia, by setting up forged and fabricated Nikahnama dated 21st February, 2020, got herself mutated in the revenue records by showing herself to be the widow of Munazir Husain, the deceased tenure holder.

¶8

The purchasers of the property from Nasreen Begum had filed a separate petition, namely, Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.13748 of 2020, in which an interim order was passed on the submission that they are bona fide purchasers of the property; they have paid sale consideration to Nasreen Begum and have purchased the same after mutation of name of the vendor and therefore their case would be distinguishable. Thereafter, Nasreen Begum approached this court by filing Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.13966 of 2020, which was dismissed by order dated 3rd December, 2020 upon finding that the case of Nasreen Begum was distinguishable from that of the purchasers of the property, inasmuch as, the allegation against Nasreen Begum was in respect of setting up fabricated/false Nikahnama to claim herself as second wife of Munazir Husain.

¶9

The instant petition has been filed by those accused who are part of the Nikahnama as witnesses. Their case is that they are not direct beneficiaries of such transaction and their case is distinguishable from that of Nasreen Begum.

¶10

As the allegation is in respect of setting up false claim of marriage on the basis of fabricated Nikahnama and the petitioners are stated to be privy to that Nikahnama, the case of the petitioners would fall in the same category as that of Nasreen Begum, which has been dismissed by us.

¶11

In view of the above, the petition is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to apply for bail/anticipatory bail, as may be advised.

¶12

Order Date :- 14.12.2020. Rks.

Nasimuddin and 3 Others v. State of U P and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nasimuddin 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abdul Qadir and Another Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Sushila Devi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shakuntala @ Shakeela and Another Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Arvind Kumar Gupta and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Abdul Tarik Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Manglesh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others