Writ for F.I.R. Quashing in Allahabad High Court
IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT
ALLAHABAD, SITTING AT LUCKNOW
Writ Petition No. of 2024 (CRLP)
XXXXX and others …………Petitioners
Versus
State of U.P.
& others …..…….Opposite Parties
INDEX
|
Sr.No. |
Particulars |
Page No. |
|
1. |
Date and Events |
|
|
2. |
Interim Relief Application. |
|
|
3. |
Memo of Writ Petition. |
|
|
4. |
Annexure No.1 A photo
copy of the Second FIR dated 25.01.2024. |
|
|
5. |
Annexure No.2 A true
photo copy of FIR date 19.11.2023. |
|
|
6. |
Affidavit. |
|
|
7. |
I.D. Proof
of deponent. |
|
|
8. |
Vakalatnama. |
|
Lucknow
Dated: -
(Vinod
Kumar Pandey)
Advocate
Counsel for petitioners
A.O.R. No.-B/-0839
Mobile-9415381583
IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT
ALLAHABAD, SITTING AT LUCKNOW
Writ Petition No. of 2024 (CRLP)
XXXXX and others …………Petitioners
Versus
State of U.P.
& others …..…….Opposite
Parties
Dates and Events
|
Sr.No. |
Dates |
Events |
|
1. |
19.11.2023 |
The
FIR was lodged at Crime No.-000029
of 2024 U/s- 498A/323/494/IPC & ¾ D.P. Act, P.S. XXXXX District-Lucknow
on the same set of facts of the First F.I.R. No.515/2023 U/S- 498A IPC and ¾ D.P.
Act. Police Station Sarojini Nagar District Lucknow on 19.11.2023 against the
petitioner No.1, 2 and 4. |
|
2. |
09.05.2021 |
The marriage of the petitioner No.1 & 2’s son namely Shubham Singh
has solemnized with opposite party No.4 on 09.05.2021 at parental house of
opposite party No.4 without any demand of dowry. |
|
3. |
10.05.2021 |
After marriage the opposite party No.4 came to see off petitioner No.1
& 2’s house on 10.05.2021 at Village Village XXXXXX Post Kodra Saraiya
Police Station Shahabad District Hardoi and her was rude against the
petitioners and also her husband. |
|
4. |
|
The petitioner
No.1 is brother-in-law, petitioner No.2 is father-in-law, petitioner No.3 is
cousin father-in-law and petitioner No.4 is nanad of the opposite party No.4. |
|
5. |
|
When opposite party No.4 came back to the house of petitioner No.1 and
2 and thereafter her nature was rude against the petitioners and also her
husband and she also started quarreling with petitioners and said to live
separate with the relatives of her husband. |
|
6. |
|
The petitioner No.1 & 2 also made a house in New Basti Sarojni
Nagar, Lucknow. |
|
7. |
|
Living after 10 days the opposite party No.4 came to the house of petitioner
No.1 & 2 with her husband and the nature of opposite party No.4 was not
good in respect of her husband quarrelsome with her husband and went to her
father’s house, and she used to come and go frequently at her will from her husband’s
house to her father’s house and her father’s house to her husband’s house in
Lucknow. |
|
8. |
|
During this period the opposite party No.4 became pregnant in the bed
lock of her husband and after pregnancy she went to her father’s house and at
the time of delivery, she came back her husband’s house at Lucknow and at the
time the petitioner No.1 came to Lucknow to look after the opposite party No.4. |
|
9. |
27.01.2023 |
At the time of delivery, the opposite party No.4 admitted in Lok
Bandhu Hospital, Lucknow and on 27.01.2023 a male child was born. |
|
10. |
|
After discharge from hospital the petitioner No.4 came to house of her
husband and at Holi Festival she went to her father’s house with all jewelries,
ornaments and clothing. |
|
11. |
|
The petitioner No.2 and his son namely Shubham Singh went to opposite
party No.4 for bidai several times till October 2023 but she was not ready to
come to the house of her husband and also said that she will not live with
her husband and he can remarry with other lady. |
|
12. |
19.11.2023 |
On
19.11.2023 the opposite party No.4 lodged the FIR against the petitioner
No.1,2 and 4 & her husband namely Shubham Singh in case crime No.515 of
2023 U/S 498A IPC & ¾ D.P.Act P.S.- Sarojini Nagar, Lucknow on the basis
of false and fabricated story. |
|
13. |
25.01.2024 |
In the second F.I.R. lodged on 25.01.2024 in case crime No.028/2024
U/s 498A, 323, 494 IPC and ¾ D.P. Act P.S.- XXXXX District Lucknow in this
FIR opposite party No.4 shown the cause of action on 01.09.2023 that the
petitioners and her husband beaten her and tried to burn by sprinkling petrol
on her body and thrown her out of house but in the first F.I.R. lodged on 19.11.2023
in case crime No.515/2023 U/s 498A IPC Police Station Sarojini Nagar Lucknow the
opposite party No.4 not shown the same incident, because no such incident
took place and the second FIR is lodge after being tutored by experts. |
|
14. |
19.11.2023 |
According to prosecution story the FIR No.515 of 2023 dated 19.11.2023
that the marriage of opposite party No.4 was solemnized with Shubham S/o Jitendra
Pal Singh before 2 ½ years ago and she has a male child aged about 9 months. That
the mother-in-law, father-in-law and nanad used to torcher to the opposite party
No.2 for dowry and the opposite party No.4 heard that her husband has solemnized
marriage with other girl till then the opposite party No.4 is most bothered. |
|
15. |
|
After
though the opposite party No.4 again lodged FIR in case crime No.000029 of
2023 U/s- 498A/323/494/IPC & ¾ D.P. Act, P.S. XXXXX District-Lucknow on
the same set of facts. The true photo copy of FIR No.000029 is already
annexed to this writ petition. |
|
16. |
|
The opposite party No.4 lived with her husband separately in Lucknow
and the petitioners lived in District Hardoi in their parental house. |
|
17. |
|
the petitioner No.4 is nanad of opposite party No.4 and she lived with
her husband in her sasural since long time ago and she never comes her father’s
house because she has done inter cast love marriage against the will of her
parents. |
|
18. |
|
The petitioners never demanded any dowry from the opposite party No.4
or from her father and the marriage solemnized without any demand of dowry
from opposite party No.4’s father. |
|
|
|
Hence this petition. |
Lucknow
Dated: -
(Vinod
Kumar Pandey)
Advocate
Counsel for petitioners
Mobile-9415381583
IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT
ALLAHABAD, SITTING AT LUCKNOW
Writ Petition No. of 2024 (CRLP)
5Rs Stamp
XXXXX and others …………Petitioners
Versus
State of U.P.
& others …..…….Opposite
Parties
Application for Interim Relief
The
petitioners most respectfully submit as under: -
For the facts and reasons mentioned
in the accompanying writ petition duly supported by an affidavit, it is most respectfully
prayed that during the pendency of the writ petition, this Hon’ble Court may
kindly be pleased to direct the opposite parties not to arrest the petitioners
on the basis of impugned First Information Report lodged by the O.P. No.4
contained as Annexure No.1 with the writ petition.
Such other orders, as may
deemed just and proper, be also passed in the favour of petitioners.
Lucknow
Dated: -
(Vinod
Kumar Pandey)
Advocate
Counsel for petitioners
Mobile-9415381583
Code:
Group:
F.I.R. Quashing
Crime No.-0029 of 2024
U/s- 498A/323/494/IPC
& ¾
D.P.Act
P.S. XXXXX
District-Lucknow
IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT
ALLAHABAD, SITTING AT LUCKNOW
Writ Petition No. of 2024 (CRLP)
100 Rs Stamp
1. XXXXX, aged about 47 years, W/o Sri Jitendra Singh
@ Jitendra Pal Singh.
2. Jitendra Pal Singh @ Jitendra Singh aged about 48 years,
S/o Sri Avadhesh Pal.
3. Yogendra Singh aged about 52 years S/o Sri Avadhesh
Pal Singh.
4. Shakshi Sigh @ Muskan Singh aged about 20 years D/o
Sri Jitendra Pal Singh W/o Sri Ayushman Josef.
All R/o Village XXXXXX Post Kodra Saraiya Police
Station Shahabad District Hardoi.
…………Petitioners
Versus
1. State of U.P. through Principal Secretary
Home Department U.P., Civil Secretariat, Lucknow.
2. Police Commissioner, Commissionerate,
Lucknow.
3. S.H.O./Investigating Officer of Case Crime
No.-000029 of 2024 U/s- 498A/323/494/IPC & ¾ D.P. Act, P.S. XXXXX District-Lucknow.
4. Rita
Singh @ Ritu Singh D/o Sri Naye Bax Singh R/o Badekheda Post Bhatgaon P.S. XXXXX,
Sarojani Nagar District Lucknow.
Writ Petition under
article 226 of the constitution of India
To,
The Hon’ble
Chief Justice,
& other Hon’ble companion Judges of this
The petitioners beg to submit as under: -
1. That this is the
first writ petition filled by the petitioner U/A- 226 Constitution of India and
the petitioners have not filed any other writ petition before this Hon’ble
Court or at Allahabad for the same relief.
2. That the
petitioners further declare that they have not received any caveat or notice by
any of the opp. parties through Registered Post or any other sources.
3. That the
present petition has been filed for quashing the impugned Second First Information
Report lodged by the opposite party No.4 which was registered as Crime No.-000029 of 2024 U/s- 498A/323/494/IPC & ¾ D.P.
Act, P.S. XXXXX District-Lucknow on the same set of facts of the First F.I.R. No.515/2023
U/S- 498A IPC and ¾ D.P. Act. Police Station Sarojini Nagar District Lucknow on
19.11.2023 against the petitioner No.1, 2 and 4. A photo copy of the Second FIR
is being annexed herewith as Annexure
No.1 to this writ petition.
4. That the FIR
is filed to this writ petitioner so the prosecution story is not being
reiterate.
5. That the marriage
of the petitioner No.1 & 2’s son namely Shubham Singh has solemnized with
opposite party No.4 on 09.05.2021 at parental house of opposite party No.4
without any demand of dowry.
6. That after marriage
the opposite party No.4 came to see off petitioner No.1 & 2’s house on
10.05.2021 at Village Village XXXXXX Post Kodra Saraiya Police Station Shahabad
District Hardoi and her was rude against the petitioners and also her husband.
7. That on the
ritual of Chauth the opposite party No.4 went to see off her parental house (mayaka)
with her relatives.
8. That the petitioner
No.1 is brother-in-law, petitioner No.2 is father-in-law, petitioner No.3 is
cousin father-in-law and petitioner No.4 is nanad of the opposite party No.4.
9. That when opposite
party No.4 came back to the house of petitioner No.1 and 2 and thereafter her
nature was rude against the petitioners and also her husband and she also
started quarreling with petitioners and said to live separate with the
relatives of her husband.
10.
That the petitioner No.1 & 2 also made a house
in New Basti Sarojni Nagar, Lucknow.
11.
That living after 10 days the opposite party No.4
came to the house of petitioner No.1 & 2 with her husband and the nature of
opposite party No.4 was not good in respect of her husband quarrelsome with her
husband and went to her father’s house, and she used to come and go frequently at
her will from her husband’s house to her father’s house and her father’s house
to her husband’s house in Lucknow.
12.
That during this period the opposite party No.4 became
pregnant in the bed lock of her husband and after pregnancy she went to her
father’s house and at the time of delivery, she came back her husband’s house
at Lucknow and at the time the petitioner No.1 came to Lucknow to look after
the opposite party No.4.
13.
That at the time of delivery the opposite party
No.4 admitted in Lok Bandhu Hospital, Lucknow and on 27.01.2023 a male child was
born.
14.
That after discharge from hospital the petitioner
No.4 came to house of her husband and at Holi Festival she went to her father’s
house with all jewelries, ornaments and clothing.
15.
That the petitioner No.2 and his son namely Shubham
Singh went to opposite party No.4 for bidai several times till October 2023 but
she was not ready to come to the house of her husband and also said that she
will not live with her husband and he can remarry with other lady.
16.
That on 19.11.2023 the opposite party No.4 lodged
the FIR against the petitioner No.1,2 and 4 & her husband namely Shubham
Singh in case crime No.515 of 2023 U/S 498A IPC & ¾ D.P.Act P.S.- Sarojini
Nagar, Lucknow on the basis of false and fabricated story. A true photo copy of
FIR date 19.11.2023 is being annexed as Annexure No.2 to this writ
petition.
17.
That according to prosecution story the FIR No.515
of 2023 dated 19.11.2023 that the marriage of opposite party No.4 was solemnized
with Shubham S/o Jitendra Pal Singh before 2 ½ years ago and she has a male
child aged about 9 months. That the mother-in-law, father-in-law and nanad used
to torcher to the opposite party No.2 for dowry and the opposite party No.4
heard that her husband has solemnized marriage with other girl till then the
opposite party No.4 is most bothered.
18.
That in the second F.I.R. lodged on 25.01.2024 in
case crime No.028/2024 U/s 498A, 323, 494 IPC and ¾ D.P. Act P.S.- XXXXX
District Lucknow in this FIR opposite party No.4 shown the cause of action on
01.09.2023 that the petitioners and her husband beaten her and tried to burn by
sprinkling petrol on her body and thrown her out of house but in the first F.I.R.
lodged on 19.11.2023 in case crime No.515/2023 U/s 498A IPC Police Station Sarojini
Nagar Lucknow and the opposite party No.4 not shown the same incident, because no
such incident took place and the second FIR is lodge after being tutored by
experts.
19.
That after thought the opposite party No.4 again
lodged FIR in case crime No.000029 of 2023 U/s- 498A/323/494/IPC & ¾ D.P. Act,
P.S. XXXXX District-Lucknow on the same set of facts. The true photo copy of
FIR No.000029 is already annexed to this writ petition. The true photo copy of
F.I.R. dated 25.01.2024 is already filed as Annexure No.1 to this writ
petition.
20.
That in fact the petitioners are innocent and have
been falsely implicated in the above noted case by the informant due to harassment
of petitioner.
21.
That the opposite party No.4 lived with her husband
separately in Lucknow and the petitioners lived in District Hardoi in their
parental house.
22.
That the opposite party No.3 is cousin father-in-law
of opposite party No.4 and living separately from many years ago from petitioner
No.1 & 2.
23.
That the petitioner No.4 is nanad of opposite party
No.4 and she lived with her husband in her sasural since long time ago and she never
comes her father’s house because she has done inter cast love marriage against
the will of her parents.
24.
That the petitioners never demanded any dowry from
the opposite party No.4 or from her father and the marriage solemnized without
any demand of dowry from opposite party No.4’s father.
25.
That the Hon’ble Apex Court held in case T.T Antony
Vs State of Kerala and others reported (2001) 6 Supreme Court cases 181 in
paragraph 20 that, “From the above decision in follows that under the scheme
of the provisions of Section 154, 155, 156, 157, 162, 169, 170 and 173 Cr. P.C.
only the earliest or the first information in regard to the commission of a
cognizable offence satisfies the requirements of section 154 Cr.P.C. Thus have
can be no second F.I.R. and consequently there can be no fresh investigation
receipt of every subsequent information in respect of the same cognizable
offence or the same occurrence or incident giving rise to one or more cognizable
offences. On receipt of information about a cognizable offence or an incident
giving rise to a cognizable offence or offences and on interim the F.I.R. in
the Station House Diary the Officer-In-Charge of Police Station has to investigate
not merely the cognizable offence reported in the F.I.R. but also other
connected offences found to have been committed in the course of the same transaction
or the same occurrence and file the more one or more response provided in
Section 173 Cr.P.C.”
26.
That no such incident has taken place and the
present case is after thought only to implicate the petitioners.
27.
That from the perusal of the F.I.R. no offence as
alleged is made out against the petitioners.
28.
That the petitioners have not committed any offence
as alleged in FIR lodged by the opposite party No.4.
29.
That in view of the facts and circumstances stated in
above, it would be expedient in the interest of justice that this Hon’ble Court
may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned Second First Information Report lodged
by the opposite party No.4 which was registered as Crime No.-000029 of 2024 U/s- 498A/323/494/IPC & ¾ D.P.
Act, P.S. XXXXX District-Lucknow on the same set of facts of the First F.I.R. No.515/2023
U/S- 498A IPC and ¾ D.P. Act. Police Station Sarojini Nagar District Lucknow on
19.11.2023 against the petitioner No.1, 2 and 4, in the interest of justice,
equity and good conscience.
30.
That the petitioners having no other efficacious and
alternative remedy invoking jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court U/s 226
Constitution of India preferred this petition on the following grounds: -
GROUNDS
A. Because, the
present petition has been filed for quashing the impugned Second First Information
Report lodged by the opposite party No.4 which was registered as Crime No.-000029 of 2024 U/s- 498A/323/494/IPC & ¾ D.P.
Act, P.S. XXXXX District-Lucknow on the same set of facts of the First F.I.R. No.515/2023
U/S- 498A IPC and ¾ D.P. Act. Police Station Sarojini Nagar District Lucknow on
19.11.2023 against the petitioner No.1, 2 and 4
B. Because, the
impugned FIR has been lodged against the petitioners due to malafide intention
and is after thought.
C. Because, in
the second F.I.R. lodged on 25.01.2024 in case crime No.028/2024 U/s 498A, 323,
494 IPC and ¾ D.P. Act P.S.- XXXXX District Lucknow in this FIR opposite party
No.4 shown the cause of action on 01.09.2023 that the petitioners and her
husband beaten her and tried to burn by sprinkling petrol on her body and thrown
her out of house but in the first F.I.R. lodged on 19.11.2023 in case crime No.515/2023
U/s 498A IPC Police Station Sarojini Nagar Lucknow the opposite party No.4 not
shown the same incident, because no such incident took place and the second FIR
is lodge after being tutored by experts.
D. Because, according
to prosecution story the FIR No.515 of 2023 dated 19.11.2023 that the marriage
of opposite party No.4 was solemnized with Shubham S/o Jitendra Pal Singh
before 2 ½ years ago and she has a male child aged about 9 months. That the mother-in-law,
father-in-law and nanad used to torcher to the opposite party No.2 for dowry
and the opposite party No.4 heard that her husband has solemnized marriage with
other girl till then the opposite party No.4 is most bothered.
E. Because, after
though the opposite party No.4 again lodged FIR in case crime No.000029 of 2023
U/s- 498A/323/494/IPC & ¾ D.P. Act, P.S. XXXXX District-Lucknow on the same
set of facts. The true photo copy of FIR No.000029 is already annexed to this
writ petition.
F. Because, in
fact the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the above
noted case by the informant due to harassment of petitioner.
G. Because, the
opposite party No.4 lived her husband separately in Lucknow and the petitioners
lived in District Hardoi in their parental house.
H. Because, the
opposite party No.3 is cousin father-in-law of opposite party No.4 and living
separately from many years ago from petitioner No.1 & 2.
I. Because, the
petitioner No.4 is nanad of opposite party No.4 and she lived with her husband
in her sasural since long time ago and she never comes her father’s house because
she has done inter cast love marriage against the will of her parents.
J. Because, the
petitioners never demanded any dowry from the opposite party No.4 or from her
father and the marriage solemnized without any demand of dowry from opposite
party No.4’s father.
K. Because, the
Hon’ble Apex Court held in case T.T Antony Vs State of Kerala and others reported
(2001) 6 Supreme Court cases 181 in paragraph 20 that, “From the above
decision in follows that under the scheme of the provisions of Section 154,
155, 156, 157, 162, 169, 170 and 173 Cr. P.C. only the earliest or the first
information in regard to the commission of a cognizable offence satisfies the
requirements of section 154 Cr.P.C. Thus have can be no second F.I.R. and consequently
there can be no fresh investigation receipt of every subsequent information in respect
of the same cognizable offence or the same occurrence or incident giving rise
to one or more cognizable offences. On receipt of information about a cognizable
offence or an incident giving rise to a cognizable offence or offences and on
interim the F.I.R. in the Station House Diary the Officer-In-Charge of Police
Station has to investigate not merely the cognizable offence reported in the F.I.R.
but also other connected offences found to have been committed in the course of
the same transaction or the same occurrence and file the more one or more
response provided in Section 173 Cr.P.C.”
L. Because, no
such incident has taken place and the present case is after thought only to
implicate the petitioners.
M. Because, from
the perusal of the F.I.R. no offence as alleged is made out against the
petitioners.
N. Because, the
petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged in FIR lodged by the
opposite party No.4.
PRAYER
Wherefore it
is most humbly prayed that this
i.
a writ, order or directions in the nature of certiorari
for quashing the impugned Second First Information Report lodged by the opposite
party No.4 which was registered as Crime No.-000029 of 2024 U/s- 498A/323/494/IPC & ¾ D.P.
Act, P.S. XXXXX District-Lucknow which is contained as Annexure No.1 to this
writ petition.
ii.
a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus commanding the opposite parties not to arrest the petitioners on the
basis of impugned FIR during the pendency of the writ petition.
iii.
Any other writ, order or direction which this
Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper as the circumstances of the case, be also
passed in favour of petitioners.
Lucknow
Dated: -
(Vinod
Kumar Pandey)
Advocate
Counsel for petitioners
Mobile-9415381583
IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT
ALLAHABAD, SITTING AT LUCKNOW
Writ Petition No. of 2024 (CRLP)
10Rs Stamp,
Affidavit photo, Affidavit Coupan
1. XXXXX, aged about 47 years, W/o Sri Jitendra Singh
@ Jitendra Pal Singh.
2. Jitendra Pal Singh @ Jitendra Singh aged about 48 years,
S/o Sri Avadhesh Pal.
3. Yogendra Singh aged about 52 years S/o Sri Avadhesh
Pal Singh.
4. Shakshi Sigh @ Muskan Singh aged about 20 years D/o
Sri Jitendra Pal Singh W/o Sri Ayushman Josef.
All R/o Village XXXXXX Post Kodra Saraiya Police
Station Shahabad District Hardoi.
…………Petitioners
Versus
1. State of U.P. through Principal Secretary
Home Department U.P., Civil Secretariat, Lucknow.
2. Police Commissioner, Commissionerate,
Lucknow.
3. S.H.O./Investigating Officer of Case Crime
No.-000029 of 2024 U/s- 498A/323/494/IPC & ¾ D.P. Act, P.S. XXXXX District-Lucknow.
4. Rita
Singh @ Ritu Singh D/o Sri Naye Bax Singh R/o Badekheda Post Bhatgaon P.S. XXXXX,
Sarojani Nagar District Lucknow.
…..…….Opposite
Parties
A F F I D A V I T
I, Jitendra Pal Singh aged about 48 years son
of Avdhesh Pal R/o XXXXXX, Kodra Saraiya, Hordoi, Shahabad, Uttar Pradesh-241124,
Occupation- agriculture, Education- literate,
the deponent, do hereby solemnly affirm and States on oath as under: -
1.
That
the deponent is the petitioner No.2 in the instant petition and doing pairavi
on behalf of other petitioner after being duly authorized by them. And as such
he is fully conversant with the facts of the case.
2.
That the contents of paras……………………………of
the accompanying petition are true to my own knowledge and those of
paras…………………………. are based record and those of paragraphs………………………. are
believed by me to be true on the basis of legal advice.
3.
That the Annexure No. 1 to 2 with the
petition are true/Photocopies of their originals.
Lucknow:
Dated: (Deponent)
VERIFICATION
I,
the above-named deponent hereby verifies that the contents of paras 1 to 3 of
this affidavit are true to my personal knowledge. No part of it is false and
nothing material has been concealed.
So, help me God.
Lucknow:
Dated: (Deponent)
I,
identify the deponent, on the basis of documents produced by him, who has
signed before me.
Advocate
Solemnly affirmed before me on at
A.M./P.M. by the deponent, Shri Jitendra
Pal Singh, who is
identified by Mr. P.N. Mishra, Advocate, High Court, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow.
I have satisfied myself by
examining the deponent that he understands the contents of this affidavit,
which have been read over and explained by me.
Oath Commissioner
Very useful for juniars lowyer.
ReplyDelete