Disposed

Raj Kumar Jindal v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC24 Jun 2020CRLP/6284/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the petition for quashing the impugned FIR and granted protection against arrest to the petitioner during the investigation phase under s. 173(2) Cr.P.C., imposing a condition of cooperation with the investigation.

What did the court decide?

Protection against arrest granted pending submission of the police report under s. 173(2) Cr.P.C., conditional on cooperation with investigation.

Raj Kumar Jindal Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 6284 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Raj Kumar Jindal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Mishra,Akhilesh Kumar Mishra

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

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

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A.

¶7

This petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer for issuing a writ of certiorari, thereby quashing the impugned First Information Report dated 01.06.2019, registered as Case Crime No. 1170 of 2019, under Sections 420, 406, 447, 448, 353 I.P.C. and 2/3 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, P.S. Sahibabad, District Ghaziabad with a further request for issuing a mandamus directing the respondents not to arrest the petitioner in pursuance of above First Information Report.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that petitioner is a bona fide purchaser of property being said to be nontransferable and he had raised construction over it. Other accused persons, placed under similar circumstances, have been granted protection by this Court. One Rajeev Sardana in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 18016 of 2019 has been given protection vide order dated 28.06.2019 by this Court. The person who had transferred this land to petitioner has also been given protection. Hence, this writ petition with above prayer.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the aforesaid prayer, but could not oppose those factual aspect.

¶10

From the perusal of First Information Report, it is apparent that 500 houses were constructed over above land and neither informant nor any other instrumentality of State ever objected these constructions and during inquiry, the persons making construction, presented their sale deed with regard to their plots. Present petitioner is also a bona fide purchaser. Hence, the facts are being investigated, but till submission of the police report, under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., there is ground of giving protection against arrest with regard to present petitioner Raj Kumar Jindal , like others were granted by coordinate Bench,

¶11

provided he co-operates with the investigation of the case and will not temper or influence the evidence.

¶12

With the above direction, this petition is finally disposed of .

¶13

Order Date :- 24.6.2020 NS

Raj Kumar Jindal v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Kumar Jindal 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Maharam and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Vikesh Thakur Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Smt. Phoolmati Devi Vs State

Mona Sharma and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ajeet Fauji and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others