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

Satish Chandra @ Satish Porwal vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|27 November, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 40
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 34072 of 2018 Petitioner :- Satish Chandra @ Satish Porwal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ratan Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to correct the prayer. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A for the State.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 30.10.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 425 of 2018, under Sections 306 I.P.C., P.S.- Mangalpur, District- Ramabai Nagar.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there being no recital in the impugned F.I.R. that the petitioner had either abetted or instigated the deceased to commit suicide, no cognizable offence against the petitioner is made out. Moreover, apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned F.I.R., no credible evidence whatsoever is forthcoming even prima facie indicating at the complicity of the petitioner in the commission of the alleged crime and the impugned F.I.R., which is a bundle of lies and product of malice, 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 allegations made therein, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is disclosed against the petitioner and the impugned F.I.R. is not liable to be quashed on the basis of the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned F.I.R., 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 his extending full co-operation during investigation.
With the aforesaid direction, this petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 27.11.2018 KS
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

Satish Chandra @ Satish Porwal vs State Of U P And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
27 November, 2018
Judges
  • Bala Krishna Narayana
Advocates
  • Ratan Kumar Mishra