The Court refused to quash the F.I.R. against the petitioner for alleged crimes under IPC and a banned chits Act. However, it granted a two-month stay on coercive action if the petitioner surrenders and applies for bail within that period.
Stay on coercive action for two months or until surrender and bail application, subject to conditions.
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. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 15084 of 2019
Petitioner :- Kapil Narula Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- J.B. Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J. Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Mithlesh Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State.
This writ petition has been filed with the prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F. I. R. which has been registered as Case Crime No.163 of 2017, under Sections 420, 120-B IPC, and section 3/4/5/6 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (banning) Act 1978, Police Station Phase-III, Noida, District Gautam Budh Nagar.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned first information report has been lodged by the complainant-respondent containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against the petitioner with the ulterior intention of harassing the petitioner; no evidence is forthcoming even prima facie indicating at the complicity of the petitioner in the commission of alleged offence and hence the impugned F.I.R. which is a bundle of lies and motivated by malice, is liable to be quashed.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the impugned F. I. R., it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out, hence the impugned F.I.R. is not liable to be quashed.
Having heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned first information as well as the other material brought on record, we are not inclined to quash the impugned F.I.R.
However, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case, petitioner appears and surrenders before the court below within two months from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. For a period of two months from today or till petitioner surrenders and applies for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against petitioner. However, in case, petitioner does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.
With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 29.5.2019 Puspendra
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned First Information Report under Sections 420, 120-B IPC and Prize Chits Act is liable to be quashed.
Whether a stay on coercive action against the petitioner is warranted pending surrender and bail application.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P.Referred¶10
2004 (57) ALR 290
Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.Referred¶10
2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC)
Kapil Narula
State Of U.P.
2 Others
Vipin Sinha
Pankaj Bhatia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
