Criminal Misc. Writ Petition filed to quash an FIR under Section 409 IPC. The High Court held that the FIR discloses a cognizable offence and dismissed the petition. The petitioner was directed to apply for bail within thirty days.
Writ petition dismissed; liberty to apply for bail within thirty days if surrendered.
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. - 46
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 26018 of 2019
Petitioner :- Kurban Ali Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohammad Adnanul Haq,Lihazur Rahman Khan
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has invoked extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the FIR dated 9.8.2019 registered as Case Crime No.207 of 2019, under Section 409 IPC, P.S. Bhot, District Rampur.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is being unnecessarily harassed on the basis of false allegations made against him while prima facie no cognizable offence is made out pursuant to the FIR lodged by the respondent no.2. Hence the FIR deserves to be quashed.
Per contra learned A.G.A contended that the allegations made in the first information report cannot be aborted at this stage. The petitioner will have sufficient opportunity to rebut the allegations.
The Full Bench of this Court in Ajit Singh @ Muraha Vs. State of U.P., 2006 (56)ACC 433 reiterated the view taken by the earlier Full Bench in Satya Pal Vs. State of U.P., 2000 Cr.L.J. 569, after considering the various decisions including State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604 that there can be no interference with the investigation or order staying arrest unless cognizable offence is not ex-facie discernible from the allegations contained in the FIR or there is any statutory restriction operating on the power of the police to investigate a case.
From the perusal of the FIR, prima facie it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out. Hence no ground exists for quashing of the FIR or staying the arrest of the petitioner.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
However, it is provided that if the petitioner appears or surrenders before the Court concerned within thirty days from today and applies for bail in the aforesaid case, his prayer for bail shall be considered by the courts below expeditiously, in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 20.12.2019 M. Tariq
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the FIR can be quashed on the ground that no cognizable offence is made out.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Kurban Ali
State of U.P.
Naheed Ara Moonis
Dinesh Pathak
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
