Single judge dismissed a petition seeking quashing of an FIR implicating the petitioner in cheating and sex selection offences, holding the FIR disclosed a cognizable offence requiring investigation.
Prayer for quashing of the FIR and grant of interim relief denied.
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. - 21374 of 2018
Petitioner :- Sandeep Kumar Sharma @ Sandeep Sharma Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shyam Lal,Abhilasha Singh,Ashutosh Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Shyam Lal, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri N.K. Verma, learned AGA 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 20.7.2018, registered as case crime no.1329 of 2018, u/s 420, 120-B IPC and Sections 3(1), 4, 5(1)(a), 6(a), 23, 25, 27 of Preconception and Prenatal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994, P.S. Loni, district Ghaziabad.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is class 12th passed and running a NGO, copy of the certificate is annexed on page 21 of the present petition. The petitioner has been shown to be the owner of the Nursing Home in question where the offence is stated to have been committed, the said Nursing Home is of the wife of petitioner and petitioner has no concern with the said offence.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR which discloses the 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 petitioners, 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 :- 7.8.2018 Gaurav
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the FIR discloses cognizable offence warranting intervention under Article 226
Whether the petitioner had concern with the offence alleged to have been committed in the Nursing Home
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Sandeep Kumar Sharma @ Sandeep Sharma
State Of U.P.
Ramesh Sinha
Dinesh Kumar Singh-I
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
