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

Papua 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. - 7531 of 2018 Petitioner :- Papua Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashish Goyal Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajesh Dayal Khare,J. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to stay the arrest of the petitioners in pursuance of the impugned F.I.R. dated 17.02.2017, which has been registered as Case Crime No. 133 of 2017, under Sections 379, 411 IPC, Police Station Kasna, District Gautam Budh Nagar.
It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is not named in the FIR lodged by the respondent no.3 Rinku Singh and his name has came into the light after ten months of lodging of present FIR.
It is next contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that no motorcycle was recovered from the possession or at his pointing out.
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

Papua vs State Of U P And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
28 March, 2018
Judges
  • Rajesh Dayal Khare
Advocates
  • Ashish Goyal