This disposal rejects a writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR. The court held that the FIR disclosed a cognizable offence against the petitioner, precluding extraordinary judicial intervention under Article 226.
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. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 20730 of 2018 Petitioner :- Sushil Kumar Bajpai @ Chanakya Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Rakesh Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Deepak Mishra, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 18.5.2018, registered as case crime No.100 of 2018, under Sections 406, 420, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Raipurwa, District Kanpur Nagar.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with malafide intention. He further submitted that the petitioner was only found to be present at the place of occurrence where the other accused assaulted the informant and threatened him. The petitioner has not assaulted the informant. He further argued that the petitioner has not received any single penny from the informant. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is absolutely false, frivolous and baseless. No offence is made out against the petitioner, hence, FIR is liable to be quashed by this Court.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR which discloses cognizable offence.
After having examined the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned FIR, we are of the opinion that the impugned FIR discloses cognizable offence against the petitioner, 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 FIR or for grant of any interim relief to the petitioner.
The petition lacks merit and is, accordingly , dismissed.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
Order Date :- 1.8.2018/NS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the impugned FIR disclosing a cognizable offence is maintainable and liable to be quashed under Article 226 of the Constitution.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sushil Kumar Bajpai @ Chanakya
State Of U.P.
Two Others
Ramesh Sinha
Dinesh Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
