Dinesh Saini @ Dinesh and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC23 Oct 2024CRLP/7851/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR under BNS Sections 69, 352 and SC/ST Act provisions on the ground that the informant is already married. Court issued notice, sought counter affidavit within four weeks, and directed that petitioners not be arrested till next listing subject to cooperation in investigation.

What did the court decide?

Interim order: petitioners not to be arrested on basis of impugned FIR till next date of listing, unless credible evidence exists; cooperation in investigation required.

Dinesh Saini @ Dinesh and Others vs State of U.P. Thru… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 10

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7851 of 2024 Petitioner :- Dinesh Saini @ Dinesh And Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Karunesh Singh,Ram Sumiran Yadav,Vijay Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J. Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.

¶4

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

¶5

By means of this petition, the petitioner has sought quashing of First Information Report dated 3.10.2024 bearing F.I.R./Case Crime No.162 of 2024, under Sections 69, 352 of B.N.S., 2023, and Sections 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha) & 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, registered at Police Station Maharua, District Ambedkar Nagar.

¶6

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the informant is already a married lady and, therefore, the allegation made in the F.I.R. that the petitioner is not marrying her is, on the face of it, illegal and incorrect. To prove the marriage of informant-opposite party no.4, copies of certain judicial proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act and other Acts are filed along with the writ petition.

¶7

Prima facie , a case for consideration is made out.

¶8

Issue notice to opposite party no.4.

¶9

Office shall submit service report by affixing computer generated tracking report.

¶10

Let counter affidavit be filed within four weeks.

¶11

List after four weeks.

¶12

Considering the submissions made, it is provided that till the next date of listing, the petitioners shall not be arrested on the basis of the impugned First Information Report, unless sufficient and credible evidence is available against them. The petitioners shall, however, cooperate in the investigation and get their statement recorded before the Investigating Officer as

¶13

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.

¶14

[Om Prakash Shukla,J.] [Vivek Chaudhary,J.]

¶15

Order Date :- 23.10.2024 Sachin

¶16

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

Dinesh Saini @ Dinesh and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh Saini @ Dinesh and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. 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

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

Brajesh Kumar Awasthi, Advocate vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Others

Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Ministry of Home U.P. Lko. and Others

Rakesh Gautam vs State of U.P. Thru. Home Deptt. Lko. and Others

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

Ghanshyam vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Others