Disposed

Jagnnath and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC31 May 2024CRLP/3888/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR was filled with the notice issued to the opposing side. The court directed that petitioners would not be arrested unless there is sufficient evidence. They must provide their statement to the police upon being called.

What did the court decide?

Temporary protection from arrest until sufficient evidence is found; victims are directed to file counter-affidavits and bind petitioners to provide statements to police.

Jagnnath and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 9

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 3888 of 2024

¶3

Petitioner :- Jagnnath And Another

¶4

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Others

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Sudhakar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J. Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶8

By means of this petition, the petitioners have sought quashing of F.I.R. dated 11.04.2024 bearing Case Crime/FIR No.0225/2024 for the offence under Sections 493, 504, 506, 354 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, registered at Police Station P.G.I., District Lucknow.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the main accused is already arrested and petitioner No.1 is the father of the main accused and petitioner No.2 is brother-in-law (Jija) of main accused. Both the petitioners are innocent and no offence as alleged in the impugned FIR is made out. The main charges is against accused person- Bipin Mishra, who is already arrested. The impugned FIR against the petitioners has been lodged with false and exaggerated contention just to harass the petitioners, therefore, same is liable to be quashed.

¶10

Learned AGA has accepted notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

¶11

Let notice be issued to opposite party No.3.

¶12

Three weeks time is granted to respondents for filing counter affidavit.

¶13

One week time thereafter shall be available to petitioner for filing rejoinder affidavit, if any.

¶14

List thereafter.

¶15

Considering the submission made, it is provided that the petitioners shall not be arrested on the basis of the impugned First Information Report, unless and until there is sufficient and cogent evidence available against them regarding commission of the offence. They shall get their statement recorded before the Police as and when they are called. If they do not do so, then it can be made a ground for seeking vacation of this interim order.

¶16

Order Date :- 31.5.2024

¶17

Reena/-

¶18

(Narendra Kumar Johari,J.) (Vivek Chaudhary,J)

¶19

Digitally signed by :- REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Jagnnath and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagnnath and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Kushma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Others

Shiv Poojan Tiwari and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. / Addl. Chief Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Sanjay Soni vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lko. and Others

Mrs. X Complainant of Case Crime NO.-78/2024 Distt. Balrampur vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko. and Othres

Mohit Singh Alias Lakki and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Others

Vishnu Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Others