Ajaj Ahmad v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC23 Jan 2024CRLP/496/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court on a criminal writ petition quashing an FIR and for stay of arrest. Petitioner claimed false implication and provided medical documents establishing travel inconsistent with alleged incident. Court issued notice, asked for exchange of pleadings, extended interim stay on arrest contingent on statement recording and document verification.

What did the court decide?

Interim stay on arrest continued; notice issued to opposite party; pleadings to be exchanged within four weeks; petitioner to record statement within fifteen days subject to verification of documents.

Ajaj Ahmad vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 9

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 496 of 2024

¶3

Petitioner :- Ajaj Ahmad Respondent :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Lalji Yadav,Vishnu Prakash Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

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

¶5

On 23.1.2024, we had passed the following order:

¶6

"Heard.

¶7

This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari for quashing of the First Information Report dated 20.7.2023 registered as FIR No. 255 of 2023 under Sections 452, 504, 506, 354B, 376 IPC and 3/4 of POCSO Act Police Station, Kandhai, District Pratapgarh and for a direction to the respondents not to arrest the petitioner pursuant to the impugned FIR.

¶8

The contention of the petitioner's counsel is that the case of the petitioner is a false implication on account of reason mentioned in para 5 of the writ petition. The petitioner was to leave for Dubai and had gone to Mumbai by train on 11.7.2023 in this connection. He was medically examined for the said purpose on 17.7.2023, therefore, the incident, which is said to have occurred in the night of 16.7.2023 is absolutely false.

¶9

Let learned AGA seek instructions as to the evidence collected as of now against the petitioner and also as to whether the aforesaid version has been taken into consideration. The aforesaid aspect may also be taken into consideration.

¶10

List/put up this case on 7.2.2024 as fresh.

¶11

Subject to verification of the aforesaid version and the documents, copies of which are annexed with the petition, it is provided that till the next date of listing, petitioner shall not be arrested pursuant to the impugned FIR, unless there is sufficient and credible evidence available against him. The petitioner shall, however, cooperate in the investigation and get his statement recorded before the Investigating Officer as and when he is called. If he does not do so then it can be made a ground for seeking vacation of this interim order.

¶12

It is made clear that if the aforesaid documents are found to be false or fabricated, benefit of this order shall not be

¶13

available to the petitioner."

¶14

In response thereto, learned AGA has received instructions that statements of the victim under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. have been recorded wherein she has supported the prosecution case, however, as of now he does not have instructions as to the veracity of the documents filed by the petitioner which have been mentioned in the above quoted order nor regarding the version of the petitioner that he had gone to Mumbai and was to leave for Dubai specially the averments made in para 5 of the petition.

¶15

Issue notice to opposite party no. 4.

¶16

Let the pleadings be exchanged within four weeks.

¶17

List immediately thereafter.

¶18

Interim order, granted earlier, shall continue until further orders.

¶19

The petitioner shall get his statement recorded before the police within the next fifteen days.

¶20

Sri D.S. Rana, learned AGA shall ensure the compliance of the same.

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 7.2.2024 AKK

¶23

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

Ajaj Ahmad v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajaj Ahmad v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vijay Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Govt. of U.P. Lucknow and Others

Asha Ram and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lko. and Others

Rajendra Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Others

Shyamu vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl., Chief Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Govt. Lucknow and Others

Waqar Khan and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Others

Mohd. Asgar (in the Fir Asgar Abbas) and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. Civil Sectt. Lko. and Others