Court dismissed writ petition quashing FIR but directed State to refrain from coercive action against petitioners until charge sheet submission under Section 173(2) CrPC.
Direction to State authorities not to take coercive action against petitioners till submission of charge sheet under Section 173(2) of CrPC.
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. - 3
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 34759 of 2018
Petitioner :- Vikas And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sandeep Kumar Rai,Shyam Narain Rai Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker,J. Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.
Heard Sri Sandeep Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr Amit Sinha, learned AGA for respondent nos.1 and 2.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking quashment of FIR dated 19.08.2018 in respect of Case Crime No.0695 of 2018 for the offence under Sections 26, 26-A of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, P.S. Bishrakh, District Gautam Budh Nagar.
According to the petitioners, petitioner no.1-Vikas is a Director of M/s Satyam Properties, whereas petitioner no.2-Lalit Chaudhary is a Director of M/s Raj Assobild. Counsel for the petitioners submits that whatever construction has been carried out by them has been done with prior approval of the competent authority and as on date, no construction activities are going on at the site. He submits that if any illegal construction is being carried out by the petitioners, then definitely, the competent authority can take action against them, but if the construction is in accordance with law, no coercive steps shall be taken against them. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that if the petitioners are arrested, they would suffer irreparable loss.
On the other hand, learned AGA for the State opposes the petition.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegations levelled against the petitioners, we are not
inclined to quash the criminal proceedings.
However, we finally dispose of this petition with a direction to the State authorities that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners in respect of above stated crime number till the submission of charge sheet under Section 173 (2) of Cr P C before the court concerned.
It is made clear that this order would remain effective till the petitioners cooperate in the investigation.
Order Date :- 3.12.2018 RKK/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the quo warranto petition seeking quashing of FIR should be allowed given the nature of allegations.
Whether coercive action should be restrained against petitioners until the charge sheet is submitted.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Vikas
Lalit Chaudhary
State Of U.P.
Pritinker Diwaker
Umesh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
