Petitioner sought quashing of FIR under Essential Commodities Act. Court refused to quash but directed no arrest until credible evidence emerges or police report is submitted under Section 173 Cr.P.C.
Prayer for quashing refused; direction issued against arrest until investigation concludes or credible evidence arises.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 32
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 12122 of 2018
Petitioner :- Hari Shankar Saroj Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pramod Kumar Singh,Manvendra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ajay Kumar Yadav,Kamal Kumar
Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A.
This petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. of case crime No. 66 of 2018, under Section 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act, Police Station Barsathi, District Jaunpur.
From the perusal of the F.I.R. it appears that on the basis of the allegations made therein prima facie cognizable offence is made out. There is no ground for interfering in the F.I.R. Therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned F.I.R. is refused.
However, considering the allegations made in the FIR, the provisions of section 157 Cr.P.C. and the view taken by the Apex Court in the case of Joginder Kumar Versus State of U.P. 1994 Cr.L.J.,1981 , it is directed that the petitioner shall not be arrested in the above mentioned case, till credible evidence is not available against him during the investigation or till submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., whichever is earlier.
With the above direction this petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 14.5.2018
vinay
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Joginder Kumar Versus State of U.P. 1994 Cr.L.J.,1981Applied¶8
Hari Shankar Saroj
State Of U.P.
Shashi Kant Gupta
Bachchoo Lal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
