Disposed

Shadab Ali v. State of U P and 2 Others

Allahabad HC27 Aug 2020CRLP/8351/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This miscellaneous writ petition sought quashing of an FIR alleging civil dispute. The court exercised discretion to direct no arrest for the petitioner pending the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., conditional on cooperation with the investigation.

What did the court decide?

Directed that the petitioner shall not be arrested until the submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., provided he cooperates with the investigation.

Shadab Ali Vs State of U P and 2 Others — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8351 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Shadab Ali Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amir Khan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

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

¶5

Heard Sri Amir Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt. Archana Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.

¶6

This petition has been filed with the prayer to quash the F.I.R. dated 31.05.2020 registered as Case Crime No. 806 of 2020, under Sections 452, 354Kha, 323, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Bulandshahr.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was some property dispute between the petitioner and the family member of respondent no.3 in which an N.C.R. from the side of the petitioner has been lodged against the family member of respondent no.3, hence the present first information report has been lodged against the petitioner for putting pressure upon the petitioner to compromise the matter. This is the case of no injury and further no such incident as alleged in the FIR has ever taken place. He submits that the dispute between the parties, if any, is purely civil in nature, hence the same is liable to be quashed by this Court.

¶8

Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of respondents no.1 and 2 vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing of the first information report.

¶9

Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and nature of the allegations, it is directed that the petitioner shall not be arrested in above mentioned case, till the submission of the police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. provided he co-operate with the investigation of the case.

¶10

With the above direction this petition is finally disposed of.

¶11

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

¶12

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 Prajapati

Shadab Ali v. State of U P and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shadab Ali 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