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

Nagendra Alias Nagina Chaudhary vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|17 September, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 25758 of 2018 Petitioner :- Nagendra Alias Nagina Chaudhary Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Ravindra Nath Kakkar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned FIR dated 10.09.2017 registered as Case Crime No. 1008 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366, 368 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 P.O.C.S.O. Act, P.S. Sector-20 Noida, District Gautam Budh Nagar.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the father of one of the main accused, Rahul Chaudhary who according to the F.I.R. allegation had kidnapped the daughter of the respondent no. 3. He next submitted that the prosecutrix, Kumari Khushboo and one Shahnaz who were kidnapped by co-accused, Sunny and Rahul in their statements recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. have not made any allegation against the petitioner. Moreover apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned F.I.R. no credible evidence whatsoever is coming forth even prima facie indicating at the petitioner's complicity in the commission of the alleged crime and for the aforesaid reason the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.
Per contra learned A.G.A. submitted that from the perusal of the impugned F.I.R. and on the basis of the allegation made therein, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is disclosed against the petitioner.
After having heard learned counsel for the parties present and perused the impugned F.I.R., we are not inclined to quash the same.
However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we direct that investigation of the aforesaid case shall go on but the petitioner shall not be arrested till the submission of police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. subject to his extending full co-operation during investigation.
With the aforesaid direction, this petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 17.9.2018 SA
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

Nagendra Alias Nagina Chaudhary vs State Of U P And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
17 September, 2018
Judges
  • Bala Krishna Narayana
Advocates
  • Rakesh Kumar Srivastava