Ashish Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC11 Nov 2024CRLP/8370/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of an FIR under BNS Sections 137(2), 127(2) and POCSO Sections 7/8 alleging false implication; the complainant's counsel did not dispute that the complainant filed an affidavit stating no offence was committed. Court directed counter affidavit within two weeks and granted interim protection from arrest till next listing.

What did the court decide?

Interim order: petitioners not to be arrested on basis of impugned FIR till next date, subject to cooperating in investigation.

Ashish Kumar and Another vs State of U.P… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 10

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8370 of 2024

¶3

Petitioner :- Ashish Kumar And Another

¶4

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Neelam Verma Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

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

¶6

1. Vakalatnama filed today on behalf of the

¶7

complainant/opposite party no.4 by Shri Atul Kumar Verma, Advocate, and supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the petitioners are taken on record.

¶8

2. Heard.

¶9

3. By means of this petition, the petitioners, Ashish Kumar and Chandra Pal , have sought quashing of First Information Report dated 06.10.2024 bearing F.I.R./Case Crime No.571 of 2024, under Sections 137 (2), 127(2) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (B.N.S.), 2023 and Section 7/8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Bachhrawan, District Raebareli.

¶10

4 . The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioners is that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the impugned F.I.R. According to learned Counsel, on 03.09.2024, when the complainant had scolded the alleged victim for not doing domestic work, then the complainant's daughter has left her

¶11

parental house in wrath on 04.09.2024 and started residing at the house of her relative, but due to some misunderstanding and misguidance, brother-in-law of the complainant, while taking complainant's thumb impression on a blank paper, gave it to the police station, on the basis of which impugned F.I.R. has been lodged against the petitioners and co-accused Suman. He has submitted that the complainant herself has given an application dated 24.10.2024 on affidavit before the concerned authority, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure No. SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit, stating therein that the petitioners and co-accused Suman have not committed any offence as alleged in the impugned F.I.R., hence the impugned F.I.R. may be quashed.

¶12

5. Learned Counsel for the complainant does not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶13

6. Therefore, a case for consideration is made out.

¶14

7. Let counter affidavit be filed within two weeks.

¶15

8 . List after two weeks, showing the name of Shri Atul Kumar Verma as Counsel for the complainant/opposite party no.4 in the cause list.

¶16

9 . Considering the submissions made, it is provided that till the next date of listing, the petitioners, Ashish Kumar and Chandra Pal , shall not be arrested on the basis of the

¶17

impugned First Information Report, unless sufficient and credible evidence is available against him. The petitioners shall, however, cooperate in the investigation and get their statement recorded before the Investigating Officer 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.

¶18

(Om Prakash Shukla, J.) (Vivek Chaudhary, J.)

¶19

Order Date :- 11.11.2024 Ajit

¶20

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

Ashish Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashish Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 5 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

Nirmal Kumar Tiwari and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. and Others

Kamlesh Kumar Mishra and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others

Anoop Rastogi and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Others

Smt. Neelam Alias Basanti vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Others

Munni Lal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and 3 Others

Smt. Jasmeen Bano @ Jasmeen and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others