Allahabad High Court
Imran Khan @ Mohd. Imran & Anr. vs State Of U.P. Thru Prin. Secretary Home, ... on 19 February, 2021
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2021 ALL 824
Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Rajeev Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 9 Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 4314 of 2021 Petitioner :- Imran Khan @ Mohd. Imran & Anr. Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin. Secretary Home, Lko. & Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Indra Mani Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
Heard Shri Indra Mani Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Dinesh Singh Rana, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners namely Imran Khan @ Mohd. Imran and Nazma Khatoon, seeking quashing of the First Information Report of Case Crime No.335 of 2020, under Sections 354, 354(Gha), 506 I.P.C. & Sections 7/8 of POCSO Act & Sections 3/5 Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Ordinance, 2020, Police Station Saadat Ganj, District Lucknow, with a further prayer for directing the respondent Nos.2 & 3 to provide security to the petitioners.
Learned A.G.A. has pointed out that the charge sheet has been prepared against the petitioner and the same will be submitted to the competent court shortly.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged by the respondent No.4 against the petitioner No.1, in which the petitioner No.1 has already got himself bailed out. He further submitted that the petitioner No.2 is the mother of the petitioner No.1 and the respondent No.4 is harassing them, hence, they have come up before this Court by filing the present writ petition.
After having examined the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned F.I.R., we are of the opinion that the accused-petitioner No.1 has already got himself bailed out in the present matter and the impugned F.I.R. discloses cognizable offence against the petitioner No.1, hence, no interference is called for by this Court in its extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the F.I.R. or for grant of any interim relief to the petitioner.
In view of the same, the present petition is hereby dismissed.
(Rajeev Singh,J.) (Ramesh Sinha,J.) Order Date :- 19.2.2021 S. Shivhare