Chhotu And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2018 Latest Caselaw 1120 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 1
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 14234 of 2018
 

 
Petitioner :- Chhotu And 2 Others
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Brahma Kumar Tiwari
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.

Heard Sri B.K.Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri G.P.Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned FIR as well as material brought on record.

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to quash the FIR dated 14.5.2018, registered as case crime No.136 of 2018, under Sections 452, 354(A), 323, 506 I.P.C., P.s. Adarsh Mandi, District Shamli.

It has been submitted by the petitioners that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case with malafide intention. He further submits that no specific time of the incident has been mentioned by the complainant in the impugned FIR, hence, the prosecution story is doubtful and unbelievable. He next argued that the impugned FIR has been lodged by the respondent no.3 containing absolutely false, concocted, vague and sweeping allegations against the petitioners. It has next been submitted that apart from the bald allegations made in the FIR no credible evidence whatsoever is forthcoming even prima facie indicating the petitioners' complicity in the commission of the alleged offence qua the petitioner no.2, who is wife of petitioner no.1, hence the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed.

Per contra learned AGA for the State submitted that the impugned FIR is not liable to be quashed on the basis of the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners.

After having heard learned counsel for the parties present and perused the impugned FIR as well as the other material brought on record, we dispose of this writ petition with the following directions:

(i) Investigation of the aforesaid case shall go on but the petitioner no.2 who is wife of petitioner no.1 shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case till the submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., subject to their cooperation during investigation.

(ii) As far as the petitioner nos. 1 & 3 are concerned, the petition stand dismissed.

With this direction, this petition is finally disposed of.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)

Order Date :- 30.5.2018/NS