Disposed¶10

Mohd. Daud and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC22 Jun 2020CRLP/6000/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR refused; investigation-stage protection from arrest granted. Keywords: Article 226 writ petition; FIR Case Crime No. 0358 of 2020; Sections 379, 411 IPC; Sections 21, 4 MMDR Act 1957; Section 41 Cr.P.C. release; Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. police report; sand/minerals transportation; P.S. Soraon, Prayagraj; petitioners Mohd. Daud and Vasib Ali; counsel Ashok Kumar Yadav; State of U.P.; G.A./A.G.A.; disposed of with directions; Bench: Bachchoo Lal, J. and Ram Krishna Gautam, J.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing the FIR declined; protection against arrest granted to both petitioners till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., subject to cooperation with investigation and non-interference/tampering with evidence. ¶10

Mohd. Daud and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2… — Mining and Natural Resources | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 6000 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Mohd. Daud And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J. Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present writ petition under Article 226 of constitution of India has been filed by Mohd. Daud and Vasib Ali with prayer for quashing the first information report dated 11.05.2020 registered as Case Crime No. 0358 of 2020 under Sections 379, 411 I.P.C. read with Section 21, 4 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, P.S. Soraon, District Prayagraj.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that it was a valid transportation under permit, attached at page no.30. All the documents were valid even then, driver Daud was apprehended on the spot but he was released in view of Section 41 of Cr.P.C. It was a malicious accusation hence, this petition with above prayer.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer.

¶9

Having heard both side and gone through material on record, it is apparent that truck was apprehended while it was loaded with sand and minerals, driver Daud petitioner no.1 was apprehended on the spot. It was to be with no documents, whereas documents are being said to be proper. But it is a question of investigation. Hence there is no ground for quashing of first information. However, under above facts and circumstances there is a ground for grant of protection against arrest of both petitioners Mohd. Daud and Vasib Ali till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., provided both of petitioners shall cooperate with the investigation and do not interfere or temper with evidences.

¶10

With above directions this writ petition is finally disposed of .

¶11

Order Date :- 22.6.2020/Md Faisal

Mohd. Daud and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Daud and Another 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

Poonam Pal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

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

Rahul and 2 Others Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Ram Nath and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Noor Alam @ Guddu and 2 Others Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Mangal Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others