Dismissed

Kazu @ Taaz Mohammad v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC7 Feb 2023A482/42006/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. sought quashing of criminal proceedings alleging false implication. The High Court declined to quash the prosecution due to lack of material supporting false implication, allowing NBW cancellation upon appearance after 30 days.

What did the court decide?

The charge sheet, cognizance order, NBWs and proceedings were not quashed. Coercive action stayed for 30 days; NBW may be cancelled if applicant appears and applies within that period.

Kazu @ Taaz Mohammad Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42006 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Kazu @ Taaz Mohammad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar Yadav,Ankit Kumar Sahu Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 22.1.2018, cognizance order dated 06.2.2018, Non Bailable Warrant dates 20.11.2022 and the proceedings of Case Crime No. 1533 of 2017 under Sections 452, 323, 506 IPC, Police Station Lanka, District Varanasi, pending in the court of Additional Special Judge POCSO-2nd Varanasi.

¶7

Submission is, the applicant has been falsely implicated owing to certain disputes between opposite party No. 2 and his family at one side and the brother of the applicant namely Kallu on the other. The applicant claims to be resident of Mumbai. Therefore, it has been submitted, he has no concern with the occurrence, if any. In any case no serious offence is alleged against the applicant. Only allegation is with respect to offence under Section 452 IPC.

¶8

On the other hand, learned AGA would submit, the defence being set up is factual in nature. Evidence would have to be considered before any firm conclusion may be reached as to involvement of the present applicant and the role played by him.

¶9

Having heard learned counsel for parties and having perused the record, keeping in mind the factual nature of allegations made and there being no material available as may lead to the conclusion of

¶10

complete false implication of the applicant or of malicious prosecution lodged against the applicant or such like ground, prayer to quash the prosecution is declined.

¶11

As to the further prayer regarding Non Bailable Warrant issued, it is provided, if the applicant appears before the learned court below within 30 days from today and apply for cancellation of NBW, the learned court below may cancel the NBW subject to compliance by the applicant.

¶12

For a period of 30 days or till the disposal of the application to be filed by the applicant, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.

¶13

Present application is disposed of accordingly.

¶14

Order Date :- 7.2.2023 Faraz

¶15

Digitally signed by :- FARAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kazu @ Taaz Mohammad v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kazu @ Taaz Mohammad v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Vijay Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anil Kumar Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and Another

Km Afreen Shahid Vs State of U.P. and Another

Agar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Bandana Mishra Vs State of U.P and Another

Harprasad and Another Vs State of U.P.