Disposed

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

Allahabad HC3 Dec 2024CRLP/5590/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner seeks quashing of an F.I.R. alleging false implication in a suicide-related case. Court notes arguments for and against, finds a case for consideration exists, lists for counter affidavit, and passes interim order restricting arrest unless credible evidence emerges.

What did the court decide?

Interim order restraining arrest of petitioner unless sufficient and credible evidence is available; case listed for consideration after counter affidavit.

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

¶1

Court No. - 9

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5590 of 2024

¶3

Petitioner :- Amit

¶4

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Udai Pratap Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

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

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Ramesh Kumar Srivastava, Advocate, who has filed his Power today on behalf of opposite party no.4, which is taken on record. His name shall be shown in the cause list as appearing for opposite party no.4 when the case is next listed.

¶7

By means of this petition, the petitioner has sought quashing of First Information Report dated 20.7.2024 bearing F.I.R./Case Crime No.0339 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 123 & 351(3) of B.N.S, 2023, registered at Police Station Kamlapur, District Sitapur.

¶8

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. On the averments made in the F.I.R., it appears to be a case of suicide. Even otherwise, if on the very first day, family was aware of the correct facts, they ought to have lodged the F.I.R. immediately and there would not be any delay in lodging of the F.I.R.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for opposite party no.4 strongly oppose the petition, stating that as per F.I.R., no case is made out.

¶10

In view of the aforesaid facts, a case for consideration is made out.

¶11

Let counter affidavit be filed within four weeks.

¶12

List after four weeks.

¶13

Considering the submissions made, it is provided that till the next date of listing, the petitioner shall not be arrested on the basis of the impugned First Information Report, unless sufficient and credible evidence is available against him. The petitioner shall, however, cooperate in the investigation and get

¶14

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.

¶15

[Narendra Kumar Johari,J.] [Vivek Chaudhary,J.]

¶16

Order Date :- 8.8.2024 Sachin

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MEHROTRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt. Madhu Dwivedi and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Others

Rakesh Rawat and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko and Others

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

Aysa Khatoon and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Aquib Sultan vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Secy. Lko. and Others

Smt. Rekha and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Home Secy. Lko. and 3 Others