Disposed

Rashid and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC11 Nov 2020CRLP/9715/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court rejected the prayer to quash an FIR involving allegations of cruelty and dowry death. While the writ petition was dismissed against the husband, the court granted bail to the remaining petitioners (in-laws) until the submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., subject to their cooperation in the investigation.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing refused. Investigation directed to proceed. Arrest of petitioner no. 2, 3 and 4 stayed till police report is submitted.

Rashid and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 43

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9715 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Rashid And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shivendra Raj Singhal Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J. Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Shivenda Raj Singhal, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the State.

¶6

This writ petition has been filed, seeking a writ of mandamus, directing the respondent concerned, not to arrest the petitioner, with a further prayer for quashing the impugned FIR dated 7.8.2020 registered in Case Crime No. 0518 of 2020, Under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 452 IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Etah.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that with the arrest of petitioner no. 1 husband, the writ petition does not survive qua him. If that be so the writ petition is dismissed qua him. It is submitted on behalf of remaining petitioners i.e. brother-inlaw, father-in-law and mother-in-law of respondent no. 3 that FIR has been lodged on false / vexatious / mischievous allegations, a case of no injury, no offences are made out, FIR be quashed.

¶8

Per contra, the learned A.G.A has opposed the submission.

¶9

After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the impugned FIR as well as the other material brought on record, it cannot be said that prima facie no offence is made out against the petitioners. Therefore, the prayer for quashing the FIR is refused.

¶10

However, we dispose of this writ petition with the direction that investigation of the aforesaid case shall go on but the petitioners no. 2,3 and 4 shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case till the submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., subject to his cooperation during investigation.

¶11

The party shall file a computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad,

¶12

self attested by the petitioner alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (s) (preferably Aadhar Card).

¶13

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such 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 :- 11.11.2020

¶15

S.K.S.

Rashid and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rashid and 3 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

Zahid Abbas Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Sanjeev Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vikrant Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Ram Prakash Parihar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Lal Kamlendra Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Prem Pal Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others