Vipin Yadav v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others

Petitioner :- Vipin Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Maurya, Roopesh Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State- respondents.

The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 12.12.2024 registered as Case Crime No.386 of 2024, under Section 319(2), 318(4), 316(2), 352 B.N.S. and Section 66 of I.T. Act, P.S. Madiyahu, District-Jaunpur. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioner in the aforesaid case.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the informant is wife of Late Ajay Kumar Yadav, who is real brother of the petitioner. After untimely death of informant's husband, she has created pressure upon her in-laws to mutate her name over all the properties of the father of the petitioner. A case under section 9 C.P.C. has also been filed by the minor children of respondent no.3 against the petitioner and her parents in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jaunpur and the same has been registered as Original Case no.1318 of 2024 (Kumari Arushi and another vs. Shivahankar Yadav and others), which is still pending. The present first information report has been lodged against the petitioner on account of the civil dispute. A bare perusal of the FIR, no criminal offence is made out against the petitioner.

It is submitted that the Court must ensure that criminal prosecution is not used as an instrument of harassment or for seeking private vendetta or with an ulterior motive to pressurize the accused. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are false and no offence are made out against him. Even though the proceedings are pending and neither the charge sheet nor the final report has been submitted in the present case. In support of his submission, he has placed reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in M/s Indian Oil Corporation vs. NEPC India Ltd. and others, AIR 2006 SC 2780, wherein it has been held that the tendency to convert a purely civil dispute into criminal cases is to be deprecated. He has also placed reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No.932 of 2021 (Randheer Singh vs. the State of U.P. and others) decided on 02.09.2021.

As the dispute in the instant matter relates to family dispute, we are inclined to refer the matter to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court. Before referring the matter to the Mediation Centre, let notice be issued to respondent no.3 through R.P.A.D. as well as dasti summons returnable at an early date.

All the respondents may file counter affidavit within six weeks. Petitioner will have two weeks thereafter to file rejoinder affidavit.

Put up on 27.02.2025 as fresh.

Till the next date of listing, or till submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. (now Section 193(3) of Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023), whichever is earlier, the respondents are restrained from arresting the petitioner pursuant to the impugned F.I.R. subject to his co-operation in the ongoing investigation. Order Date :- 7.2.2025 Manish Himwan