Dismissed

Sudhakar Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC14 Oct 2020CRLP/10987/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to direct authorities not to arrest him and to quash an FIR under the Essential Commodities Act. The High Court dismissed the petition, holding that an alternate remedy of applying for anticipatory bail was available and leaving the merits of the FIR for appropriate proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Writ of mandamus seeking non-arrest and quashing of FIR was dismissed; merits left open.

Sudhakar Singh Vs State of U.P. and… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 43

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10987 of 2020 Petitioner :- Sudhakar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Laxmi Kant Shukla,Dharmendra Kumar Chaubey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J. Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Dharmendra Kumar Chaubey, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A.

¶5

This writ petition has been filed, seeking a writ of mandamus, directing the respondent concerned, not to arrest the petitioner, with a further prayer for quashing the impugned FIR dated 17.05.2020 in Case Crime No. 153 of 2020, under Sections 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act, P.S.- Shankargarh, DistrictPrayagraj.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that FIR has been lodged on false / vexatious / mischievous allegations, no offences are made out, FIR be quashed.

¶7

Learned AGA has opposed the submission.

¶8

The correctness of the allegations would have to be tested on the basis of the materials collected during the course of investigation as by insertion of notification No.1058/79-V-1-191 (Ka)-20-2018 dated 6th June 2019, an alternate remedy is available to the petitioner to seek for an anticipatory bail/bail as he may be advised.

¶9

The writ petition is dismissed .

¶10

It is made clear that we have not adjudicated the contentions raised which are left open for the petitioner to raise at an appropriate stage in an appropriate proceeding, in accordance with law.

¶11

The party shall file a computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioner alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (s) (preferably Aadhar Card).

¶12

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶13

Order Date :- 14.10.2020

¶14

Digitally signed by Justice Pankaj Digitally signed by Justice Vivek Vikram/Naqvi Agarwal Date: 2020.10.14 15:33:31 IST Date: 2020.10.14 15:36:31 IST Reason: Document Owner Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Allahabad

Sudhakar Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudhakar Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abbas Ali Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Monika Masih Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Dal Chand Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Lovely and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ilu Kumar @ Ravi Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Raj Kumar Bhatnagar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others