Disposed

Moijurrab @ Lala and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC5 Mar 2020CRLP/3867/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Coram dismissed a petition for quashing an FIR alleging assault. The court refused to quash the FIR but directed no arrest until the police report was filed and mandated the investigation to conclude within three months. The petitioners must cooperate with the inquiry.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners shall not be arrested until submission of Section 173(2) report; investigation to conclude within three months of certified copy.

Moijurrab @ Lala and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 3867 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Moijurrab @ Lala And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shamim Uddin Khan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J. Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Shamim Uddin Khan, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned AGA for the respondents no.1 and 2.

¶6

This petition has been filed seeking quashing of the first information report dated 05.02.2020 registered as Case Crime No.18 of 2020, under Section 147, 323, 325, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Puramufti, District Kaushambi with a further prayer not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance of the said FIR.

¶7

The allegation in the impugned F.I.R. lodged by the respondent no.3 is that on 24.11.2019 at about 4.00 pm while the informant was going on his tractor the petitioners stopped him and assaulted him with Lathi-Danda, kicks and fists and also threatened him of dire consequences.

¶8

The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that there are cross cases of the incident and both sides received injuries. It is further submitted that the story narrated in the impugned F.I.R. is wholly false and baseless. It is also submitted that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case due to ulterior motive and malafide intention, hence the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.

¶9

Per Contra, learned AGA has submitted that from perusal of the allegations made in the impugned F.I.R. it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out, hence the impugned F.I.R. is not liable to be quashed.

¶10

Having heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned first information report as well as the other material brought on record, we are not inclined to quash the impugned F.I.R.

¶11

However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, we dispose of this writ petition with the direction

¶12

that the petitioners shall not be arrested in the aforementioned case till submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. However, petitioners shall participate and co-operate with the investigation and police authorities shall conclude the investigation within three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

¶13

Order Date :- 5.3.2020 N Tiwari

Moijurrab @ Lala and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Moijurrab @ Lala and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 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

Jhinku Prasad Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Tejas Verma @ Tejas @ Banti Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Atul Pandey and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajiv Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ghanshyam Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

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