Disposed

Raj Narayan Singh and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC27 Aug 2020CRLP/8332/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The district judges allowed the petitioners' prayer to prevent their arrest pending the filing of the police report under Cr.P.C. 173(2) while directing cooperation with the investigation, finally disposing of the petition without quashing the F.I.R. or dismissing the opposition.

What did the court decide?

Directs petitioners shall not be arrested till submission of police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. but must cooperate with investigation.

Raj Narayan Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8332 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Raj Narayan Singh And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prashant Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

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

¶5

Sri S.P. Shukla has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent no. 3, is directed to file power in the registry of this Court during the course of the day.

¶6

Heard Sri Prashant Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri S.P. Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 and Sri Karunakar Singh, 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 petitioners with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. dated 22.06.2020 registered as case crime no. 179 of 2020 under sections 323, 504, 506, 352 I.P.C., police station Mahuli, District Sant Kabir Nagar.

¶8

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the sister of the respondent no. 3 is married to petitioner no. 2 and there is some matrimonial dispute going on between them and on account of which an F.I.R. under Section 498-A etc. was registered against the petitioner no. 3 and his family members in which they have been got bailed out. The respondent no. 3 is a practicing Advocate in District Basti and thereafter, the case has been transferred to Sant Kabir Nagar and in that case i.e. under Section 498A I.P.C. charge sheet has been submitted. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged just for harassment of the petitioner, hence the same is liable to be quashed by this Court.

¶9

Learned counsel for the private respondent has vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing of the impugned F.I.R. and submitted that the petitioners have manhandled the respondent no. 3 and his sister while they had gone to attend date in District Sant Kabir Nagar and hence the present F.I.R. has been lodged against them.

¶10

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

¶11

impugned F.I.R.

¶12

Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and nature of the allegations, it is directed that the petitioners 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.

¶13

With the above direction this petition is finally disposed of.

¶14

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.

¶15

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.

¶16

Order Date :- 27.8.2020 SA

¶17

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

Raj Narayan Singh and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Narayan Singh and 2 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

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