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

Laieq And Others vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|12 October, 2018


Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 29434 of 2018 Petitioner :- Laieq And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjeev Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Ravindra Nath Kakkar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to quash the impugned F.I.R. registered as Case Crime no. 674 of 2018, under Section 366 I.P.C., P.S. Amroha Nagar, district-J.P. Nagar (Amroha).
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the impugned first information report has been lodged against the petitioners pursuant to the order passed by the concerned Magistrate on the application of respondent no.4 u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. falsely alleging therein that petitioners had kidnapped their daughter. He next submitted that before lodging the F.I.R., the respondent no.4 had lodged another F.I.R. which was registered as Case Crime No.98 of 2018 in which the petitioners after surrendering before the concerned Court, had obtained bail. It is further submitted that by lodging the impugned F.I.R. which contains absolutely false and concocted allegations, respondent no.4 wants to deprive the petitioners of the liberty of bail. He next submitted 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 petitioners in the commission of the alleged crime and hence the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. submitted that the impugned F.I.R. is not liable to be quashed on the basis of the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners.
From the perusal of the impugned F.I.R., it appears that on the basis of the allegations made therein prima-facie cognizable offence is made out. There is no scope of interfering in the F.I.R, therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned F.I.R. is refused.
However, considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners and the nature of the allegations made in the F.I.R., it is directed that till the submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., the petitioners shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case subject to their extending full cooperation during investigation.
With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 12.10.2018 Shalini
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.

Laieq And Others vs State Of U P And Others


High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

12 October, 2018
  • Bala Krishna Narayana
  • Sanjeev Kumar