The Court dismissed the writ petition seeking quashment of an FIR. However, it directed authorities to refrain from coercive action against the petitioner pending the submission of the charge sheet under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.
No coercive action against the petitioner till submission of charge sheet under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.
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. - 34760 of 2018
Petitioner :- Rahul Chauhan Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Chandra Prakash Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Manu Khare
Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker,J. Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.
Heard Sri V.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri C.P. Singh for the petitioner, Sri Amit Sinha, learned AGA for State and Sri G.S. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Manu Khare for respondent no.3.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking quashment of the FIR dated 12.10.2018 in respect of Case Crime No. 741 of 2018 under Sections 420,467,468,471, 34 and 406 IPC, Police Station Phase-II Noida district Gautam Budh Nagar.
The main allegation against the petitioner is that he along with other co-accused persons have sold excessive land which was neither in possession of petitioner nor was sold to him by respondent no.3. Counsel for petitioner submits that nature of dispute is purely of civil, it has been unfortunately given criminal colour . In the case identical to the present case, this Court vide Annexure-8 to this petition, has passed protective order.
On the other hand, Sri Chaturvedi submits that when portion of land was not sold to the petitioner, question of cancelling the same does not arise. He further submits that the act done by petitioner is covered under civil law as well as under the criminal law and the petitioner cannot shirk his liability of criminal act.
Be that as it may, keeping in mind the nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner, we are not inclined to quash the first information report.The petition in that respect is dismissed.
However, in the larger interest, considering the protective order given to the two co-accused, we finally dispose of this petition with a direction to the State authorities that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner 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 petitioner cooperates in the investigation.
Order Date :- 3.12.2018 Shahid
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the FIR under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 34 and 406 IPC in a civil land dispute should be quashed.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rahul Chauhan
State Of U.P.
2 Others
Pritinker Diwaker
Umesh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
