Dismissed

Smt. Parwati and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC26 Jul 2023CRLP/11564/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court in criminal miscellaneous writ petition declined to quash FIR under Section 306 IPC regarding alleged abatement to suicide due to the seriousness of the offence. Court directed petitioners to move anticipatory bail application within ten days without expressing opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing FIR declined and refused. Petitioners directed to move anticipatory bail application within ten days.

Smt. Parwati and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:149930-DB

¶2

Court No. - 67

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11564 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Smt. Parwati And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashutosh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J. Hon'ble Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi,J.

¶6

Sri Amit Kumar, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent no. 4, which is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri Ashutosh, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Amit Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 and perused the record.

¶8

By means of the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is assailing the legality and validity of the FIR dated 10.07.2023 registered as Case Crime No.333 of 2023, under Section 306 I.P.C. P.S. Katghar, District Moradabad.

¶9

The respondent no. 4 has lodged an F.I.R. on 10.07.2023 for the incident dated 07.06.2023 under Section 306 I.P.C. against the petitioners Smt. Parwati, Smt. Kranti and Karan Pal in respect of alleged act of abatement to commit suicide of informant's son Deepak. In the F.I.R. the allegation has been made that Deepak has committed suicide due to fed up from his wife, father-in-law and mother-in-law. During life time of the deceased, serious allegation about character of the deceased was raised.

¶10

At this stage, the Court is not expressing any opinion on merit of the case but taking into account the seriousness of the offence, we are not inclined to quash the F.I.R.

¶11

Accordingly, the prayer for quashing the FIR is declined and refused.

¶12

However, it is open for the petitioners, if so advised, they shall move proper anticipatory bail application before the appropriate forum, within ten days from today which shall be decided in accordance with law.

¶13

It is also made clear that the Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. The court concerned is expected to apply its robust and judicial discretion in deciding

¶14

the anticipatory bail application as early as possible.

¶15

With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of .

¶16

Order Date :- 26.7.2023 Rmk.

¶17

Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Parwati and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Parwati 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

Gullu @ Vishnu Gopal Vs State of U.P.

Mukesh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Prachi and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Sushila Devi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohd Shamim Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Deeksha Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others