Disposed¶8

Smt. Rajwati and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC6 Feb 2020CRLP/2068/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR refused; Sections 498A, 452, 376, 494, 323 IPC; general/nonspecific allegations against parents-in-law; interim protection from arrest till Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. report subject to cooperation in investigation; Case Crime No. 0561 of 2019; P.S. Sadabad Kotwali, District Hathras; Rajwati v. State of U.P.; CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. 2068 of 2020; decided 6.2.2020.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of without quashing the FIR; petitioners no. 1 and 2 protected from arrest in pursuance of the FIR till submission of the Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. report, conditional on all petitioners cooperating and participating in the investigation, which is to be completed most expeditiously; petitioner no. 3 left free to seek other remedies available in law. ¶8

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶8

Issue for consideration

Whether the first information report dated 11.12.2019 (Case Crime No. 0561 of 2019, P.S. Sadabad Kotwali, District Hathras) under Sections 498A, 452, 376, 494, 323 I.P.C. should be quashed. +1 more

¶5

Court's answer

The first information report cannot be quashed, as the allegations made therein are sufficient to constitute a cognizable offence.

¶8

Ratio / Principle

The entire allegations in the first information report are against the husband, petitioner no. 3; the allegations against petitioners no. 1 and 2 are of general nature.

¶7

Key takeaways

Petitioners no. 1 and 2 shall not be arrested in pursuance of the first information report till submission of the report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., provided all the petitioners cooperate and participate in the investigation, which shall be completed most expeditiously.ratio¶8
It will remain open to petitioner no. 3 to seek such other remedies as may be available to him in law.obiter¶8

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 2068 of 2020 sought quashing of the FIR dated 11.12.2019, registered as Case Crime No. 0561 of 2019 under Sections 498A, 452, 376, 494, 323 I.P.C. at Police Station Sadabad Kotwali, District Hathras. The court found that the entire allegations in the FIR are against the husband (petitioner no. 3) and are sufficient to constitute a cognizable offence, while the allegations against petitioners no. 1 and 2 (the husband's parents) are of general nature. Holding that the FIR could not be quashed, the court disposed of the writ petition with the direction that petitioners no. 1 and 2 shall not be arrested in pursuance of the FIR till submission of the report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., provided all petitioners cooperate and participate in the investigation, which is to be completed most expeditiously; petitioner no. 3 remains free to seek other remedies available in law.

Smt. Rajwati and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Rajwati and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 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

Raisul Hasan Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Brijesh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 12 Others

Raj Kumar Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Pradeep Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Archana Maurya and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Satnam Alias Sattu Alias Satvinder Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others