The court dismissed a writ petition for quashing an F.I.R. alleging cheating and breast of trust over a property boundary dispute, ruling that prima facie cognizable offences were discernible and no ground existed for quashing or staying arrest.
F.I.R. is not quashed and arrest of petitioner is not stayed.
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. - 6244 of 2019 Petitioner :- Habib Ahmad Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Syed Ali Imam 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 16.11.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 112 of 2018, under sections 420, 406 IPC P.S. Bisrakh District Gautam Buddh Nagar.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that dispute relates to the boundary of the plot in question, allegations of cheating and breach of trust are against the co-accused, assuming all the allegations to be true, dispute, if any, is between the co-accused and informant, which is civil in nature, from a perusal of the FIR, no offence is made out against the petitioner, hence, the same be quashed.
Learned A.G.A, opposed the contention that merely because a civil dispute is made out, F.IR. cannot be quashed as otherwise, cognizable offences are disclosed.
The Full Bench of this Court in Ajit Singh @ Muraha v. State of U.P. (2006 (56) ACC 433) reiterated the view taken by the earlier Full Bench in Satya Pal v. State of U.P. (2000 Cr.L.J. 569) after considering the various decisions including State of Haryana v. 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 F.I.R. 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 F.I.R or staying the arrest of the petitioner.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 8.3.2019 Ram Murti
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the disputed boundary and fraudulent possession allegations are solely inter-partes civil disputes between co-accused and informant and no offence is made out against the petitioner.
Whether cognizable offences are ex-facie discernible from the allegations contained in the F.I.R. to refuse quashing.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Habib Ahmad
State Of U.P.
Pankaj Naqvi
Umesh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
