Radhey Shyam vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 16489 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:36030-DB
 
Court No. - 10
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 3940 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Radhey Shyam
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Of Civil Sectt. Lko. Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhishek Singh,Birendra Pratap Singh,Vikaas Yadav
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.

Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State/respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Shri Pankaj Shukla, Advocate who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent No.4 and perused the material placed on record.

This writ petition has been filed for quashing the F.I.R. dated 16.10.2023, registered as Case Crime No.0274 of 2022, under Sections 498, 506 I.P.C., at Police Station - Jarwal Road, District- Bahraich; and for a direction to respondents not to harass and arrest the petitioner pursuant to aforesaid F.I.R.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the impugned F.I.R. He is the relative of opposite party No.4 and he tried to mediate between the warring parties in a dispute and only to harass the petitioner, the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged against him. Learned counsel for opposite party No.4 Shri Pankaj Shukla says that opposite party No.5/informant continuously beat and tortured the opposite party No.4 to such an extent that she went to her parental house and started living there. The petitioner is a relative of opposite party No.4 and he tried to mediate between the opposite party No.4 and opposite party No.5 and he has no concern and she has not run away with the petitioner. She is still living in her parental house.

This court has perused the F.I.R. and finds that the allegations against opposite party No.4 is that she has taken away jewellery wroth around Rs.2.00 Lakh and Rs.50,000/- cash from the house.

This Court also finds that all the sections invoked against the petitioner carry a maximum punishment up to 07 years and the investigating agencies and their officers are duty bound to comply with the mandate of Section 41 and 41A of the Code and the directions issued in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273.

Accordingly, the instant petition also stands disposed of in view of the judgments cited above.

Order Date :- 23.5.2023

ML/-