Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 2208 (ALL)

Amar Singh Chauhan v. State of U. P.

2016-06-17

AMAR SINGH CHAUHAN, V.K.SHUKLA

body2016
JUDGMENT Petitioners, who are eight in number, have approached this Court with the request to quash the impugned FIR dated 07.06.2016 registered as Case Crime No.0261 of 2016 under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 376, 377 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Kharkhouda, District Meerut. 2. From the side of the petitioners, it has been sought to be contended that an ugly shape has been sought to be given in the FIR in question whereas the dispute in question is primarily of matrimonial discord and criminal forum has been misused as all the relatives have virtually been implicated as accused. 3. From the side of the first informant, Shri Yogendra Pal Singh, Advocate has submitted that the lady in question has been subjected to demand of dowry and has been harassed and victimized and not only this, she has even been sexually assaulted and accordingly, this Court should not at all come to the rescue and reprieve of the petitioners. 4. We have the occasion to peruse the First Information Report in question and as to whether matrimonial discord has been sought to be given colour for the purpose of FIR or not and as to whether offence under Section 376 , 377 IPC is made out, are certainly subject matter of consideration, in view of this, as far as we are concerned, we cannot come to the rescue and reprieve of the petitioners. The investigation will have to be carried out and will have to be brought to its logical conclusion and as such, the request made for quashing of FIR cannot be accepted and the same is accordingly turned down. 5. Petitioners' counsel next contended that as far as petitioners are concerned, no credible evidence worth name as against them has come forward connecting them with the crime in question and once there is no credible evidence connecting the accused persons with the crime in question, then to conceive of a situation that any offence has been committed by them is too far fetched. 6. Law on the subject is clear that arrest can be effectuated only when there is credible evidence available connecting the accused with the crime in question. 7. 6. Law on the subject is clear that arrest can be effectuated only when there is credible evidence available connecting the accused with the crime in question. 7. Consequently, keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case as petitioner/s allege that there is no credible evidence worth name available against petitioners, we proceed to pass an order that process of investigation should be brought to its logical conclusion and the petitioners shall extend full cooperation in the investigation and shall not hamper with the investigation but pursuant to impugned First Information Report dated 07.06.2016 registered as Case Crime No.0261 of 2016 under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 376, 377 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Kharkhouda, District Meerut, petitioners may not be arrested till credible evidence is collected or till submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., whichever is earlier. With these observations, writ petition is disposed of.