SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Vijay Kumar vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 27 September, 2019


?Court No. – 43

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. – 22047 of 2019

Petitioner :- Vijay Kumar

Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Singh,Pavan Kishore

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

Hon’ble Pankaj Naqvi,J.

Hon’ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.

Heard Sri Anil Kumar Singh learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A.

This writ petition has been filed, seeking a writ of mandamus, directing the respondent concerned, not to arrest the petitioner, with a further prayer for quashing the impugned FIR dated 5.8.2019 in Case Crime No. 0155 of 2019, under Sections 354, Section452, Section504, Section506, Section507 IPC and 3(2)(va) SC/SectionST Act, P.S. Anpara, District Sonebhadra.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that FIR is malafidely motivated and the victim admits a consensual relationship with the accused, coupled with fact that no offence under Section 3(2) (v)(a) SC/SectionST Act is made out, as the use of alleged caste abusive words are not in a public place rather in the house of victim, hence, the FIR is liable to be quashed.

Learned AGA has opposed the submission on the ground that an allegation in respect of the offence under Section 354 IPC is specially alleged disclosing cognizable offences.

We are prima facie of the view that on the allegations made in the FIR, no offence under Section 3(2)(v)(a) of SC/SectionST Act is made out, at this stage.

The correctness of the allegations would have to be tested on the basis of the materials collected during the course of investigation as by insertion of Notification No.1058/79-V-1-19-1 (Ka)-20-2018 dated 6th June 2019, an alternate remedy is available to the petitioner to seek for an anticipatory bail. We deem it appropriate to dismiss this petition without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to apply for anticipatory bail.

The writ petition is dismissed.

It is made clear that we have not adjudicated the contentions raised which are left open for the petitioner to raise at an appropriate stage in an appropriate proceeding, in accordance with law.

Order Date :- 27.9.2019/AS



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation