Disposed

Tasleem v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC27 Aug 2020CRLP/8322/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court issued an exemption order preventing the petitioner's arrest in a gangster case pending investigation, directing cooperation with the inquiry while the police report is submitted. In an interim order, a copy of the order was allowed.

What did the court decide?

Direction that petitioner shall not be arrested till submission of report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C., if any, upon condition of co-operating with investigation.

Tasleem Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8322 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Tasleem Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he could not file the certified copy of the impugned F.I.R. and prays for exemption. The exemption application is allowed.

¶6

Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Kumari Meena, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.

¶7

This petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. dated 27.2.2020 registered as case crime no. 61 of 2020 under sections 3 (1) U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, police station Adampur, District Amroha.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case on the basis of single case mentioned in the gang chart under section 379 IPC, copy of which is annexed at page-27 of the present petition though in the said case he has already been granted bail by the competent court. He further submits that the petitioner is neither member of any gang nor run any gang involved in anti-social activities. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are absolutely false, frivolous and baseless just for harassment, hence the present F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for quashing.

¶10

Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and nature of the allegations, it is directed that the petitioners, namely, Tasleem shall not be arrested in above mentioned case, till the submission of the police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C., if any, before the competent court but they shall co-operate with the investigation of the case.

¶11

With the above direction this petition is finally disposed of.

¶12

The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by it alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person(s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number(s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked, before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.

¶13

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶14

(Ajit Singh,J.) (Ramesh Sinha,J.)

¶15

Order Date :- 27.8.2020 Tamang

Tasleem v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tasleem 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

Reema Maurya Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Surekha Yadav and Another Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Deepa Katiyar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ashish Singraur Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Changez Rana Vs State of U P and 2 Others

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