Vyasmuni v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of directing that till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., the respondents are restrained from arresting the petitioner pursuant to the impugned First Information Report, subject to cooperation in ongoing investigation. Order…
Judgment
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Umesh Chandra Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondent No.4 and learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent and perused the record.
This writ petition has been filed with the prayer to quash the First Information Report dated 16.04.2025, registered as Case Crime No.0170 of 2025, under Sections- 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and 12 of Passport Act, 1967, Police Station Jhagaha, District Gorakhpur.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that with regard to the allegations against the petitioner of getting two passports on the basis of different address etc., police is investigating the matter.
Learned A.G.A. has not objected to the same.
Operative part
In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of directing that till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., the respondents are restrained from arresting the petitioner pursuant to the impugned First Information Report, subject to cooperation in ongoing investigation. Order Date :- 21.5.2025 Ashish/- ASHISH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 173(2).
Which court decided this case, and when?
Allahabad High Court, on 21 May 2025. The bench was SIDDHARTH, RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.