Allahabad High Court
Nitin And 5 Others vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 9 July, 2019
Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Raj Beer Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 44
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 18759 of 2019
Petitioner :- Nitin And 5 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Jata Shankar Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard SriJata Shankar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri A.R. Chaurasia, learned A.G.A. for the State and impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
This petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. dated 14.06.2019 registered as case crime no. 0029 of 2019 under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 354 I.P.C. and 3/4 of D.P. Act, police station Mahila Thana, District Baghpat.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the impugned FIR has been lodged by the respondent no. 4 roping in the entire family of her husband, petitioner no. 1 containing absolutely false, concocted, vague and sweeping allegations against them that they were demanding dowry from her and her parents and on account of non fulfilment of the alleged demands of dowry she was being tortured and maltreated by them in her matrimonial home. 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 at the petitioners' complicity in the commission of the alleged offence qua the petitioner nos. 2 to 6 hence the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed. It has further been submitted that so far as petitioner nos. 1 to 4 are concerned, he is not pressing this petition so far as it relates to quashing of impugned FIR. He further submits that in view of the notification No.1058/79-V-1-19-1 (Ka)-20-2018 dated 6th June 2019, provisions of anticipatory bail have been made applicable in the State of Uttar Pradesh and, therefore, the petitioner nos. 1 to 4 may be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to file an application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. before the competent Court.
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 nos. 5 and 6 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 to 4 are concerned, the petition is, accordingly, dismissed, as withdrawn, with the aforesaid liberty. However, in the eventuality of filing any such application by petitioner nos. 1 to 4, the same would be decided in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 9.7.2019
Anand
(Raj Beer Singh, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
