1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Pushpendra vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|21 February, 2019


Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 4856 of 2019 Petitioner :- Pushpendra Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ishwar Chandra Tyagi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J. Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner(s) and learned A. G. A. for the State.
This writ petition has been filed with the prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F. I. R. which has been registered as Case Crime No. 542 of 2018, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 354, 452, 376 IPC and section 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S.- Hafizganj, District- Bareilly.
Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submitted that the impugned first information report has been lodged by complainant containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against the petitioner(s) with the ulterior intention of harassing petitioner(s); petitioner has been implicated on the basis of general allegation; even though the statements of the victim recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. are believed to be true, the allegation of rape has been made against co-accused Amit, who is not a party in the present writ petition; no specific role has been assigned to the petitioner; the petitioner has been implicated solely on account of he happens to be the cousin brother of co-accused Amit with whom the girl was in a consensual relationship; reliance has been placed upon the contradictions of in the testimony of mother of the girl; the mother of the girl herself refused to get girl medically examined; the matter needs deeper and fairer investigation before any arrest should be given effect to; 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 petitioner(s) in the commission of alleged offence and hence the impugned F. I. R. which is a bundle of lies and motivated by malice, is liable to be quashed.
Per contra, learned A. G. A. has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in 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.
After having heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties present and perused the impugned first information as well as the other material brought on record, we are not inclined to quash the impugned F. I. R.
However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, we dispose of this writ petition with the direction that the petitioner(s) shall not be arrested in the aforementioned case till submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., however, petitioner(s) shall participate and co-
operate with the investigation and the police authorities are directed to complete the investigation as early as possible.
Order Date :- 21.2.2019 Kuldeep
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.

Pushpendra vs State Of U P And Others


High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

21 February, 2019
  • Vipin Sinha
  • Ishwar Chandra Tyagi