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

Neetu And Another vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|24 September, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 26480 of 2018 Petitioner :- Neetu And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 02 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sapan Kumar Singh 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 to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to arrest the petitioners and with further prayer for quashing the impugned FIR dated 14.07.2018 registered as Case Crime No.50 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 406, 328, 511 I.P.C. and Section 3 /4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Gorakhpur.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioner no. 1 and 2 are married sisters-in-law of respondent no.2 and they are living separately from her and her husband. Moreover, apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned FIR no credible evidence whatsoever is coming forth even prima facie indicating their 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 FIR and on the basis of the allegation made therein, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is disclosed against the petitioners. As far as the question of lack of evidence in support of the allegation made in the impugned FIR is concerned the same shall be collected during investigation and the impugned FIR is not liable to be quashed on the basis of the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners.
After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned FIR, we are not inclined to quash the same.
However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances, 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 their extending full co-operation during investigation.
With the aforesaid direction, this petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 24.9.2018 Anand Sri./-
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

Neetu And Another vs State Of U P And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
24 September, 2018
Judges
  • Bala Krishna Narayana
Advocates
  • Sapan Kumar Singh