Disposed

Indrawati Rai @ Neetu Rai v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC6 Feb 2024CRLP/859/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A criminal writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR. The court granted interim relief, directing that the petitioner shall not be arrested pending further proceedings and must cooperate with the investigation.

What did the court decide?

Interim direction: Petitioner will not be arrested based on the FIR unless sufficient and credible evidence is available; petitioner to cooperate with investigation.

Indrawati Rai @ Neetu Rai vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 9

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 859 of 2024 Petitioner :- Indrawati Rai @ Neetu Rai Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Indra Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G . A .

¶3

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

¶4

Heard

¶5

By means of this petition, the petitioner has sought quashing of First Information Report dated 7.11.2023 bearing case Crime No. 1193 of 2023 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 IPC, registered at Police Station- Kotwali District- Barabanki.

¶6

The contention of petitioner's counsel is that the petitioner has herself purchased a plot nearby the place where the crime is alleged to have been committed albeit from a farmer and not from the main accused- Abhimanyu Kumar Singh. She has no concern whatsoever with the company being run by Abhimanyu Kumar Singh or him and has been roped in the F.I.R. only with intent to harass her because there was a dispute as to the location of the plot purchased by the informant from Abhimanyu Kumar Singh. The dispute is purely of a civil nature in which the petitioner has no role to play. There are no such allegation in the F.I.R. so as to make out any criminal offence.

¶7

Considering the submissions made and as on a plain reading of the F.I.R., the dispute, prima facie , appears to be regarding location of the plot sold by Abhimanyu Kumar Singh to the informant, it is provided that the petitioner shall not be arrested on the basis of the impugned First Information Report, unless there is sufficient and credible evidence available against her. The petitioner shall, however, cooperate in the investigation and get her statement recorded before the Investigating Officer as and when she is called. If she does not do so then it can be made a ground for seeking vacation of this interim order.

¶8

Let notice be issued to opposite party no.4. Let the pleadings be exchanged within eight weeks. List thereafter.

¶9

(Narendra Kumar Johari,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Order Date :- 6.2.2024 Anuj Singh

¶10

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Indrawati Rai @ Neetu Rai v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indrawati Rai @ Neetu Rai v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief 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

Prabhakar Pandey and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Others

Raj Keshar Singh Alias Roshan Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Geeta Verma and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow and Others

Shiv Saran Upadhyay and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Rajiv Kumar Yadav and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Medical and Health U.P. Lko. and Others

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