Disposed

Indrajeet Kumar Arya v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC12 Mar 2024CRLP/1730/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted a stay on arrest of the petitioner challenging an FIR alleging rape. The Court directed investigation monitoring by a senior officer and noted prior allegations of malice and familial involvement, while clarifying that the order does not protect against departmental action.

What did the court decide?

Stayed arrest of petitioner; directed monitoring of investigation by a Joint Commissioner of Police; fixed notice to opposite party no. 4.

Indrajeet Kumar Arya vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 9

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1730 of 2024

¶3

Petitioner :- Indrajeet Kumar Arya Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. And Others

¶4

Counsel for Petitioner :- Vivek Kumar Mishra,Girish Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

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

¶6

Heard.

¶7

The petitioner seeks issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the First Information Report dated 1.2.2024 bearing Case Crime No. 0019 of 2024 under Sections 323, 376, 506 IPC, Police Station- Indira Nagar, District-Lucknow.

¶8

The petitioner is an Inspector of Police posted at Prayagraj. He has challenged the impugned FIR.

¶9

Let notice be issued to the opposite party no. 4. Service of notice upon opposite party no. 4-informant shall be effected by the Station House Officer concerned at the District Jail, Lucknow where she is said to be lodged in connection with the said FIR dated 20.5.2023, copy of which is annexed as Annexure-3 to the petition.

¶10

Pleadings be exchanged within eight weeks.

¶11

List immediately thereafter.

¶12

Although it is contended by learned AGA that in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the informant has supported the prosecution case but we cannot lose sight of the fact that the daughter of the petitioner had earlier lodged an FIR bearing Case Crime No. 0258 of 2023 dated 20.5.2023 at P.S. Vibhuti Khand, District Commissionerate of Lucknow against the informant of the impugned FIR under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 IPC and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act and she is in jail in connection with the said FIR and also as FIR No. 0206 of 2021 dated 3.8.2021 lodged by some other person against the informant of the impugned FIR and other accused under Sections 188, 147, 427, 504, 506 IPC at P.S. Indira Nagar, District Lucknow wherein it is said that the petitioner was the investigating officer in which charge sheet has already been filed as stated in para no. 7 of the writ petition on 3.12.2021 by another investigating officer and even after going through the copy of whats app chats annexed by the informant with her application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., it is contended by the petitioner's

¶13

counsel that at best the relationship was consensual, therefore, filing of impugned FIR dated 1.2.2024 alleging rape in the year 2021 is absolutely a malicious proceeding, accordingly, we provide that till the next date of listing, petitioner shall not be arrested in pursuance to the First Information Report dated 1.2.2024 bearing Case Crime No. 0019 of 2024 under Sections 323, 376, 506 IPC, Police Station- Indira Nagar, District-Lucknow, unless there is sufficient and cogent evidence available against him indicating commission of criminal offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. The petitioner shall, however, cooperate in the investigation and get his statement recorded before the Investigating Officer. The investigation shall be completed. It would be better if the Commissioner of Police, Lucknow gets the investigation monitored by a Senior Officer not below the rank of Joint Commissioner of Police, Lucknow so as to ensure fair investigation in the impugned FIR.

¶14

Our order shall not preclude the Police Department to proceed against the petitioner departmentally for departmental action, if its so chooses, and nothing observed herein shall be construed as being in favour of the petitioner for the purposes of the said proceedings as we are only concerned with the criminality aspect and not the departmental action which can be taken against him.

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 12.3.2024 AKK

¶17

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

Indrajeet Kumar Arya v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indrajeet Kumar Arya v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Abdul Samad vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Govt. of U.P. Home Deptt.and 3 Others

Moh. Shaban Alias Vaseem Alias Mo. Saban vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Smt. Ayesha Bano vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Civil Sectt. Lko. and Others

Saurabh Kumar Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

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

Poonam @ Poonam Verma vs State of U.P Thru. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Govt. Lko. and Others