This Court examined a petition seeking quashing of an FIR under the Arms Act where the petitioner alleged false implication by an inimical main accused, amidst recovery of weapons.
Petition dismissed with liberty to apply for bail.
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. - 33
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7427 of 2019
Petitioner :- Prahlad Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Singh,Vinay Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J. Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned AGA for respondents 1, 2 and 3; and perused the record.
The instant petition seeks quashing of the First Information Report dated 29th September, 2018 registered as Case Crime No.0193 of 2018, under Sections 3, 5, 7, 12 and 25 Arms Act at Police Station Mahrajganj, District Azamgarh.
The allegation in the first information report, which has been lodged by a member of police force, is that upon information, the police raided the premises and discovered cache of arms/weapons as also equipments/material suggesting manufacture/production and apprehended one person, namely, Ramnath, and six other persons, who are named in the first information report, were able to effect their escape.
The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that though the petitioner is named but the petitioner is a primary school teacher and he had made an attempt to lodge a first information report against the main accused of this case, namely, Ramnath, but his first information report was not lodged. It has been submitted that the police has implicated the petitioner on the basis of confessional statement of main accused Ramnath who is inimical towards the petitioner and therefore has falsely implicated the petitioner.
A perusal of the record would indicate that the police had given a chase to other persons also who were found present on the spot but could not effect their arrest and therefore, it is always open to the police to identify those persons who have escaped from the spot.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, keeping in mind that a large cache of weapons have been recovered from the spot, we do not find it to be a fit case for interference.
The petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to apply for bail.
Order Date :- 8.4.2019. Rks.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the FIR implicating the petitioner in arms possession.
Whether the facts and circumstances constitute a fit case for quashing the criminal proceedings.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Prahlad
State Of U.P.
Manoj Misra
Suresh Kumar Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
