The Allahabad High Court dismissed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR under Sections 498-A IPC, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, holding that the FIR prima facie disclosed a cognizable offence.
The prayer for quashing of the FIR and non-arrest of the petitioner was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:217470-DB
Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 17800 of 2023
Petitioner :- Ahsan Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Zafeer Ahmad Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J.
been made out for interference with the impugned first information report.
Order Date :- 16.11.2023 Nitendra
Digitally signed by :- NITENDRA TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court was justified in refusing to quash the FIR under Sections 498-A IPC, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and othersFollowed¶10
State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and others, 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335 · Who else cites this
M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of MaharashtraFollowed¶10
M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918 · Who else cites this
Leelavati Devi @ Leelawati & another vs. the State of Uttar PradeshFollowed¶10
Leelavati Devi @ Leelawati & another vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Ahsan
State Of U.P.
Vivek Kumar Birla
Manish Kumar Nigam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
