Ram Karan @ Ram Karan Verma and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Others

Allahabad HC17 Mar 2025CRLP/840/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR alleging falsification of a Pariwar Register entry used in a maintenance-related revision. Court held the matter requires consideration, issued notice, and stayed arrest subject to cooperation with investigation until police report submission or next listing date.

What did the court decide?

Arrest of both petitioners in respect of the impugned FIR stayed till next listing (17.03.2025) or police report under Section 173(2) CrPC, whichever earlier, subject to cooperating with investigation

Ram Karan @ Ram Karan Verma and Another vs State of U.P… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Court No. - 9

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 840 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ram Karan @ Ram Karan Verma And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Aviral Srivastava,Amar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A., who appears for State-respondents.

¶5

This Writ Petition has been filed with the following relief(s):

¶6

"A. quashing the impugned first information report dated 10.01.2025 has been lodged as F.I.R. no. 0016/2025 u/s 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3). 340(2) BNS 2023 Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda in respect of the petitioners. contained as Annexure No.01 to this writ petition.

¶7

B. a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties not to harass and arrest the petitioners in view of FIR dated 10.01.2025 registered as F.I.R. no. 0016/2025 u/s 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) BNS 2023 Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, District- Gonda."

¶8

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are completely innocent and have been falsely implicated in the impugned F.I.R. The allegation made in the F.I.R. is that the complainant Shobharam's house No.216 is registered in the "Pariwar Register" in his name and that of his family members, Mayawati, Madhuri and Awadesh Kumar. The complainant is living in the said house with his family members, but the petitioners in collusion with each other have shown another house No. 166 shown to be registered in the name of the complainant Shobharam and the name of Neelu Devi, the petitioner No.2 who is also the accused is shown to be mentioned in the said "Pariwar Register" for the purpose of filing a Revision No. 348 of 2021:Awadesh Kumar Vs. Neelu Devi, which is pending.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the marriage of the petitioner No.2 was solemnized with Awadesh Kumar son of Shobharam in the year 2010, but there was a matrimonial dispute and an F.I.R. No. 0438/2025 was lodged on 25.06.2015 under Sections 498A, 323, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act at Police Station Kotwali Nagar,District Gonda. The petitioner No.2-Smt Neelu Devi also

¶10

filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. on 14.10.2015 on which the Principal Judge, Family Court, Gonda has awarded Rs. 3,000/- per month as maintenance during the pendency of the suit by his order dated 08.03.2021. The son of the complainant Awadesh Kumar being aggrieved by the order has filed a Criminal Revision under Section 19 of the Family Court Act on 16.04.2021, in which the petitioner No.2 was arrayed as opposite party No.2 and the petitioner No.1 has not been impleaded as a party. In the said Criminal Revision, a counter affidavit was filed by the petitioner No.2-Smt Neelu Devi, in which she enclosed a copy of the Pariwar Register as SCA-1, which has been made the basis of the impugned F.I.R., alleging that the said document is false, showing an incorrect house number.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the said F.I.R. has been lodged without noticing the provisions of Section 215(1) (b) (ii) of the B.N.S.S., 2023, wherein it is the court concerned, where the alleged fraudulent document has been filed, which may take notice of the same and pass an appropriate order for investigation.

¶12

Prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that the matter requires consideration.

¶13

Issue notice to the opposite party No. 4.

¶14

Steps be taken within a week.

¶15

Each of the respondents is granted four weeks time to file counter affidavit.

¶16

Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may also be filed within two weeks thereafter.

¶17

List this matter on 17.03.2025.

¶18

Till the next date of listing or till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., if any, before the Competent Court, whichever is earlier, the arrest of the petitioners, namely,Ram Karan @ Ram Karan Verma and Smt. Neelu Devi in pursuance to the impugned F.I.R. lodged as F.I.R. no. 0016/2025 u/s 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3). 340(2) BNS 2023 Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda shall remain stayed, of course, subject to the restraint that the petitioners shall fully cooperate with the investigation and shall appear as and when called upon to assist in the investigation.

¶19

Order Date :- 30.1.2025/Arvind

¶20

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

Ram Karan @ Ram Karan Verma and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Karan @ Ram Karan Verma and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of 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. Parvati Alias Vimala vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Others

Smt. Arushi and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Others

Amit Trivedi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow

Nipun Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Saddam Shah @ Saddam vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 6 Others

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