Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Dilip Yadav @ Babloo Kanja vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|28 March, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7440 of 2018 Petitioner :- Dilip Yadav @ Babloo Kanja Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Arvind Agrawal Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajesh Dayal Khare,J. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to stay the arrest of the petitioner in the FIR dated 23.02.2018, which has been registered as Case Crime No. 156 of 2018, under Sections 420, 506 IPC, Police Station Firozabad South, District Firozabad.
It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the matter of co-accused Mansoor Akhtar has already been disposed of vide order dated 09.03.2018 in Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 5739 of 2018. The copy of the said order has been filed as annexure no. 7 to this petition.
He has further submitted that apart from the bald allegations made in the F.I.R., which is a bundle of lies and product of malice, no credible evidence is forthcoming, even prima facie, indicating that any such incident had taken place, hence, the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has submitted that from the perusal of 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.
From the perusal of the F.I.R., it appears that on the basis of the allegations made therein prima facie cognizable offence is made out, hence, there is no scope for interfering with the impugned F.I.R. Therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned F.I.R. is refused.
However, considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and nature of allegations made in the F.I.R., it is directed that the petitioner shall not be arrested in the aforementioned case till submission of police report under Section 173(2) CrPC or till credible evidence is collected, whichever is earlier.
With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 28.3.2018 Nadim
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Dilip Yadav @ Babloo Kanja vs State Of U P And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
28 March, 2018
Judges
  • Rajesh Dayal Khare
Advocates
  • Arvind Agrawal