Disposed

Indu Yadav v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC20 Oct 2020CRLP/8876/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two-judge bench in Allahabad High Court disposed of a criminal miscellaneous writ petition where the petitioner sought quashing of an FIR. The court granted a protection from arrest until the submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., directing cooperation with the investigation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed not to be arrested until submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.

Indu Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2020) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8876 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Indu Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vijendra Kumar Mishra,Pramod Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J. Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Shiva Ji Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Virendra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, 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 by the petitioner with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. dated 07.06.2016 registered as Case Crime No. 487 of 2016, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. Police Station-Kotwali City, District-Mirzapur.

¶7

It has been argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that different F.I.R.s were registered for a similar offence and the other accused of the said F.I.R.s had challenged the said F.I.R. before this Court in various writ petitions and one of the orders has been annexed as Annexure No. 3 to the writ petition at page 33-34 in which arrest of the accused therein has been stayed on 25.06.2020 in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 6368 of 2020. It is further stated that one of the accused had sought anticipatory bail in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 3907 of 2020, which has been allowed by the learned Single Judge of this Court vide order dated 07.07.2020, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure No. 2 to the writ petition.The allegation levelled against the petitioner who is a woman is absolutely false, frivolous and baseless. No offence is made out against the petitioner, hence, FIR is liable to be quashed.

¶8

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

¶9

Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and nature of the allegations, as well as the fact that other accused persons have been granted protection by this Court, it is directed that the petitioner namely, Indu Yadav 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

¶10

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.

¶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

Order Date :- 20.10.2020 C. MANI

Indu Yadav v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indu Yadav 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

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

Satendra Saini and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ankush Jindal and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Arun Kumar Rai and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Nebula Devi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Geeta Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others