Disposed

Mohd Idrish and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC13 Dec 2024A482/11396/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this application under Section 482 CrPC, the Allahabad High Court recorded that applicants are brother-in-law of the private respondent facing charges under Sections 498-A, 504, 506 IPC. The court issued notice to the private respondent, stayed the proceedings, and listed the matter for future hearing.

What did the court decide?

Notice issued to the private respondent; proceedings stayed; case listed for first week of February 2025.

Mohd Idrish and Another vs State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 13

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11396 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Mohd Idrish And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Abdul Samad,Divya Singh,Sunil Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The instant application is filed with the prayer to quash the proceeding of Criminal Case No.8099 of 2020, in Case Crime No.0027/2017 under Sections 498-A, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Raebareli.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants are brother-in-law of the private respondent and marriage of private respondent was solemnized with brother of the applicants, namely, Taskin. He further submits that due to some trivial issues between the husband and wife, F.I.R. in question was lodged on the basis of general allegations, thereafter, charge sheet has been submitted by the Investigating Officer. He also relies on the decision of Geeta Mehrotra & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr. reported in 2012 10 SCC 741 and requested for kind indulgence of this Court.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. oppose the prayer of the applicant but he does not dispute this fact that applicants are brother-in-law of the private respondent.

¶9

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A., going through the contents of the application as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that applicants are brother-in-law of the private respondent and general allegations have been levelled against the applicants, therefore, matter requires consideration.

¶10

Issue notice to the private respondent.

¶11

List this case in the first week of February, 2025.

¶12

Until further order, impugned proceeding shall remain stayed.

¶13

Order Date :- 13.12.2024 Gaurav/-

¶14

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd Idrish and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Idrish and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mirza Rahat Zuber Baig vs State of Up and 3 Others

Sudhir Kumar Sinha vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Sharif Ahmad vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Neelu vs Indrajeet Singh, Nagar Ayukt (Municipal Commissioner), Nagar Nigam, Lko.

Malkhan vs State of Up and Another

Mahesh Chandra Sharma and Another vs State of Up and 4 Others