Disposed

Beche Lal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC20 Feb 2024CRLP/1209/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court heard a writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR alleged to be an abuse of process. The court adjourned for notice to opposite parties and granted a direction that the petitioner shall not be arrested without cogent evidence while investigation proceeds.

What did the court decide?

Direction that petitioner shall not be arrested unless sufficient and cogent evidence is available; investigation to proceed.

Beche Lal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 9

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1209 of 2024

¶3

Petitioner :- Beche Lal

¶4

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ravindra Pandey,Vinay Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The petitioner seeks issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing First Information Report bearing Case Crime No. 0023 of 2024, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 427, 341 IPC, Police Station- Fatehpur, District- Barabanki.

¶8

The contention of the petitioner's counsel is that the impugned F.I.R. is abuse of process of the Court and has been lodged only to harass the petitioner as the petitioner was asking the informant to execute the sale deed regarding which an agreement to sell had been entered into between the petitioner and opposite party no. 4, but, he was denying the same and on account of which the petitioner had earlier lodged an F.I.R. against the informant on 03.10.2023, therefore, the F.I.R. is required to be quashed.

¶9

Issue notice to the opposite party no. 4.

¶10

Let counter affidavit be filed by opposite parties within a period of six weeks.

¶11

Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within a period of two weeks thereafter.

¶12

List thereafter.

¶13

Considering the contention of the petitioner's counsel that the impugned F.I.R. is abuse of the process of the Court and has been lodged only to harass the petitioner as the petitioner was asking the informant to execute the sale deed regarding which an agreement to sell had been entered into between the petitioner and opposite party no. 4, but, he was denying the same and on account of which the petitioner had earlier lodged an F.I.R. against the informant on 03.10.2023, therefore, the F.I.R. is required to be quashed, it is provided that the petitioner shall not be arrested in Case Crime No. 0023 of 2024, under

¶14

Sections 323, 504, 506, 427, 341 IPC, Police Station- Fatehpur, District- Barabanki, unless there is sufficient and cogent evidence available against the petitioner indicating commission of any offence by him as alleged in the impugned FIR.

¶15

The investigation shall go on.

¶16

The petitioner shall, however, cooperate in the investigation and get his statement recorded before the Investigating Officer as and when he is called.

¶17

(Narendra Kumar Johari,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.)

¶18

Order Date :- 20.2.2024 R.K.P.

¶19

Digitally signed by :- RAJ KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Beche Lal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Beche Lal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Pravesh Singh Alias Ram Pravesh Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Station in Charge Office Lucknow

Rahul Singh and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Others

Vinay Kumar Aditya vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Deo Narayan Mishra (D.N. Mishra) vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Govt. of U.P. Civil Sectt. Lko. and Others

Vivek Prajapati and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Govt. of U.P. Lko. and Others

Vinod Kumar Gupta and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Sachivalaya Lko. and Others