1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Aniruddh Pratap Singh vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|21 February, 2019


Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 4562 of 2019 Petitioner :- Aniruddh Pratap Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J. Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Kumari Meena Thakur, learned A.G.A. for the State.
This writ petition has been filed with the prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F. I. R. which has been registered as Case Crime No.0718 of 2018, under Sections 452, 354, 376-D, IPC, and Section 5g of Protection of Children from Sexual Violence Act, 2012, Police Station Mohammdabad, District Farrukhabad.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned first information report has been lodged by the complainant-respondent containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against the petitioner with the ulterior intention of harassing the petitioner; that present FIR has been lodged on 12.12.2018 in pursuance of an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C; that the respondent is habitual of lodging the false FIR; that much reliance has been placed on the averments made in paragraph nos. 10, 11 and 12 of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition; that the matter needs a deeper and fair investigation before any arrest could be given effect to; that apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned F.I.R., no evidence is forthcoming even prima facie indicating at the complicity of the petitioner in the commission of alleged offence and hence the impugned F.I.R. which is a bundle of lies and motivated by malice, is liable to be quashed.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the impugned F. I. R., it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out, hence the impugned F.I.R. is not liable to be quashed.
Having heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned first information as well as the other material brought on record, we are not inclined to quash the impugned F.I.R.
However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, we dispose of this writ petition with the direction that the petitioner shall not be arrested in the aforementioned case till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. However, petitioner shall participate and co-operate with the investigation and police authorities shall conclude the investigation within three months from the date of production of certified copy of the order.
With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 21.2.2019/VKG
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.

Aniruddh Pratap Singh vs State Of U P And Others


High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

21 February, 2019
  • Vipin Sinha
  • Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar