Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Anwar Ali and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others

Anwar Ali and Others vs State of U.P. and Others

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Nov 15, 2010
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/918192

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Allahabad High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 3212 of 2010
Subject
Arbitration

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Arbitration

Key legal issue
Arbitration

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Anwar Ali and Others

Advocate H.C. Dwivedi, Adv

Respondent

State of U.P. and Others

Advocate Govt. Advocate; Amir Khan, Advs

Excerpt

1. list revised. learned counsel for the petitioners is not present. 2. heard learned a.g.a. and perused the record. 3. this petition has been filed with a prayer to quash the impugned first information report of case crime no.117 of 2010 under sections 498a, 506 i.p.c. and 3/4 d.p. act, ps. sahaswan , district badaun. 4. on the request of learned counsel for the petitioners this matter was referred to the mediation centre of this court. the report of the mediation centre shows that both the parties are not willing in mediation. 5. the allegations made in the first information report are prma facie disclosing the commission of offence punishable under sections 498a, 506 i.p.c. and 3/4 d.p. act. 6. in view of the above, there is no good ground to interfere with this case and the prayer for quashing the impugned first information report is refused. the interim order dated 25.2.2010 is hereby vacated. 7. however, considering the fact and circumstances of the case it is directed that in case the petitioners appear before the court concerned within thirty days from today and apply for bail, their bail application shall be considered and disposed of in strict compliance of the directions given by full bench of this court in the case of smt.amrawati and another vs. state of u.p. (2004) (57) alr, 390. 8. with the above direction this petition is finally disposed of.

Full Judgment

1. List revised. Learned counsel for the petitioners is not present.

2. Heard learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

3. This petition has been filed with a prayer to quash the impugned First Information Report of Case Crime No.117 of 2010 under sections 498A, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, PS. Sahaswan , District Badaun.

4. On the request of learned counsel for the petitioners this matter was referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court. The report of the Mediation Centre shows that both the parties are not willing in mediation.

5. The allegations made in the First Information Report are prma facie disclosing the commission of offence punishable under Sections 498A, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act.

6. In view of the above, there is no good ground to interfere with this case and the prayer for quashing the impugned First Information Report is refused. The interim order dated 25.2.2010 is hereby vacated.

7. However, considering the fact and circumstances of the case it is directed that in case the petitioners appear before the court concerned within thirty days from today and apply for bail, their bail application shall be considered and disposed of in strict compliance of the directions given by full bench of this Court in the case of Smt.Amrawati and another vs. State of U.P. (2004) (57) ALR, 390.

8. With the above direction this petition is finally disposed of.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial