Dismissed

Akshat @ Chotu and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC5 Mar 2020CRLP/4298/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The bench declined to quash an FIR lodged against the petitioners for offences under IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act. The court directed that no coercive action be taken against the petitioners until a charge sheet is filed under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., subject to their cooperation in the investigation.

What did the court decide?

No coercive action against petitioners until submission of charge-sheet under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.

Akshat @ Chotu and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 48

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 4298 of 2020 Petitioner :- Akshat @ Chotu And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dr. C.P. Upadhyay Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker,J. Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶4

Dr C P Upadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Awadhesh Shukla, learned AGA for the State.

¶5

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking quashment of FIR dated 2.2.2020 in respect of Crime No.48/2020 for the offence under Sections 498-A, 354-A, 352, 323, 504, 506 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Karbi Kotwali Nagar, District Chitrakoot, lodged by respondent no.3 against the petitioners.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the marriage of petitioner no.1 was solemnized with respondent no.3-Raksha on 28.2.2019, but unfortunately, she could not adjust in the joint family and she left her matrimonial house on 20.9.2019 and thereafter, never returned to the petitioners' house and on 2.2.2020, present FIR has been lodged against the entire family. He submits that petitioner no.1 is the husband, petitioner no.2 is the father-in-law, petitioner no.3 is the mother-in-law and petitioner no.4 is the sister-in-law of the complainant. It has been argued that even as on date, the petitioners are willing to keep the complainant with them.

¶7

Learned AGA opposes the petition.

¶8

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular the nature of allegations levelled against the petitioners, we are not inclined to quash the criminal proceedings.

¶9

However, we finally dispose of this petition with a direction to the State authorities that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners in respect of above stated crime number till the submission of charge sheet under Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C. before the court concerned.

¶10

It is made clear that this order would remain effective till the petitioners cooperate in the investigation.

¶11

Order Date :- 5.3.2020 RKK/-

Akshat @ Chotu and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akshat @ Chotu and 3 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

Sajida @ Nasima Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Karishma and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mukesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sushila and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mukesh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohd Iliyas @ Sonu (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others