Writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR for heinous offences under IPC was dismissed. The Bench held that a case involving a cognizable offence and no specific injury claim cannot be quashed.
Petition for quashing of the FIR was dismissed.
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. - 43
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5767 of 2019
Petitioner :- Bhanu Pratap Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vijay Tripathi,Rajeev Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J. Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned AGA 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 17.2.2019 registered as Case Crime No. 144 of 2019, under sections 384,307,504,506 IPC P.S. Sadar Bazar District Agra.
Matter relates to an heinous offence and the contention that its' a case of no injury F.I.R cannot be quashed as a cognizable offence is disclosed.
The writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 1.3.2019 RS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the FIR disclosing a cognizable offence and involving a heinous offence with no specific injury claim can be quashed.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Bhanu Pratap
State Of U.P.
Unknown Respondent 1
Unknown Respondent 2
Unknown Respondent 3
Pankaj Naqvi
Umesh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
