# Narsingh Tiwari v. State of U.P. & Ors

- **Citation:** (2015) 2 ILRA 539
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2015-04-01
- **Case number:** Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 7438 of 2015
- **Bench:** Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, Arvind Kumar Mishra-I
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/narsingh-tiwari-v-state-of-u-p-ors-43156
- **Pages:** 2

## Headnote

Cr.P.C.-Section-439-Bail-offence
under
Section 498-a/304-B IPC-applicant being
father-in-law
of
deceased
considering
general allegation-no dying declarationsentitled for conditional bail.

## Text

2 All] Narsingh Tiwari Vs. State of U.P. & Ors
539
the court concerned to pass a fresh order on
the application of the applicant for recall of
the
witnesses
keeping
in
mind
the
observations made herein above.
9. The application stands allowed to
the extent indicated above.
10. Office is directed to send a copy
of this order to the court concerned,
within two weeks, for compliance.
--------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 01.04.2015
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE AMRESHWAR PRATAP SAHI, J.
THE HON'BLE ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA-I, J.
Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 7438 of
2015
Narsingh Tiwari
 ..Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors.
...Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner:
A.M. Tripathi
Counsel for the Respondents:
Govt. Advocate
Constitution of India,Art.-226-Quashing FIRby informant-allegations of kidnapping of
minor girl-held-subject to recourse final
report by investigation officer-under Section
157, 158 or 173 (2) Cr.P.C.-statement of
minor girl be recorded under Section 164
Cr.P.C.-with liberty to court below to pass
appropriate order-petition disposed of.
Held: Para-8
In
the
aforesaid
circumstances,
the
petitioner appears to have moved an
application
before
the
Senior
Superintendent of Police. Learned A.G.A.
therefore is right in his submissions that it
is now for the Investigating Officer to
submit his report keeping in view the
provisions of Section 157 read with
Section 158 Cr.P.C. coupled with the report
which might be submitted finally under
Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. The contention,
therefore, is that if the closure of the case
is warranted in the background aforesaid,
the same has to be attempted through the
aforesaid
agency
and
the
procedure
prescribed in law.
(Delivered by Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap
Sahi, J.)
1. Heard learned counsel for the
petitioner and Sri A.K. Sand, learned
A.G.A. for the respondents no.1, 2 and 3.
2. This is a peculiar case where the
father of the victim, who is the
complainant, has come forward with a
prayer to quash the FIR and an alternative
prayer for a mandamus to the respondent
no.3 not to interrogate the petitioner or
subject the petitioner's daughter to any
further investigation that may amount to
harassment. In effect, the prayer is that
the
petitioner
no
longer
wants
to
prosecute the accused at his instance.
3. The FIR was lodged where
allegations were made of kidnapping of
the girl who, according to the version in
the FIR, had not attained the age of
majority of 18 years and was also
mentally of a lower level.
4. The accused are alleged to have
enticed her away, hence the FIR which is
more than almost five months old.
5.
Learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that in the background that the girl has
already been recovered and she is in the
custody of the petitioner, the petitioner does not
want to take any further action in the matter
keeping in view the future of his daughter.
540
 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
6. Learned A.G.A. takes an objection
to this prayer being made by the informant
himself for quashing of the FIR on the
ground that if the allegations in the FIR are
found to be false, then there is a likelihood of
the petitioner himself being prosecuted and
this action or process can be undertaken by
the court upon a police report being filed in
the matter and not before that. In the
aforesaid circumstances, he contends that the
petitioner, who is the informant, has no locus
to get the FIR quashed in the aforesaid
background and even otherwise it is the
responsibility of the State now to find out
through its Investigating Agency as to
whether any cognizable offence has been
committed or not which is liable to be dealt
with and punishment awarded in terms of the
provisions of the Code of Criminal
Procedure as well as the Indian Penal Code.
7. We have given our thoughtful
consideration
to
this
peculiar
circumstance and it prima facie appears
that the petitioner is now praying to save
the honour of his family after this
incidence has taken place as well as
protect the future of his daughter.
8.
In the aforesaid circumstances,
the petitioner appears to have moved an
application
before
the
Senior
Superintendent of Police. Learned A.G.A.
therefore is right in his submissions that it
is now for the Investigating Officer to
submit his report keeping in view the
provisions of Section 157 read with
Section 158 Cr.P.C. coupled with the
report which might be submitted finally
under
Section
173(2)
Cr.P.C.
The
contention, therefore, is that if the closure
of the case is warranted in the background
aforesaid, the same has to be attempted
through the aforesaid agency and the
procedure prescribed in law.
9.
Apart from this, we also find it
necessary that since a report has been alleged
disclosing a cognizable offence then before
any such report is submitted or accepted by
the court concerned, it would be appropriate
that the statement of the victim is also
recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.
10.
We, therefore, direct that the
statement of the victim should be recorded
before the court below under Section 164
Cr.P.C. and thereafter it will be open to the
court concerned to pass appropriate orders in
the background aforesaid, if warranted on the
facts of the present case for closure.
11. Disposed of with the said
observations.
--------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: LUCKNOW 30.04.2015
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE RAMESH SINHA, J.
Bail No. 8441 of 2014
Ali Mohammad
 ...Applicant
Versus
The State of U.P.
...Opp. Party
Counsel for the Applicant:
Ran Vijay Singh
Counsel for the Opp. Party:
Govt. Advocate
Cr.P.C.-Section-439-Bail-offence
under
Section 498-a/304-B IPC-applicant being
father-in-law
of
deceased
considering
general allegation-no dying declarationsentitled for conditional bail.
(Delivered by Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha, J.)
1. Heard Sri Ran Vijay Singh,
learned counsel for the applicant and Sri