Disposed
Hari Shyam Upadhyay v. State of U.P. and 3 Others
Allahabad HCCRLP/9894/2020
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. -…
What the court decided
AI extract
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. -…
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. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9894 of 2020
Petitioner :- Hari Shyam Upadhyay Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J. Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard Sri Rohit Upadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the State.
This writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the FIR dated 10.07.2020 registered as Case Crime no. 0189 of 2020 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, P.S. Patiyali, District Kasganj with a further prayer not to arrest the petitioner in pursuance of the said FIR.
The present FIR has been lodged by the respondent no.4 alleging that the petitioner who was appointed as Assistant Teacher in Primary School on 1.07.2011, his B.Ed degree is forged.
The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the impugned first information report has been lodged by complainant containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against the petitioner with the ulterior intention of harassing the petitioner. Reliance has been placed upon the order dated 13.9.2019 passed in Writ A no. 13785 of 2019 in which indulgence has been granted in favour of similarly placed co-accused; matter requires deeper and fairer investigation before any arrest should be given effect to and the petitioner will participate and co-operate with the investigation; apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned F. I. R., no evidence is forthcoming even prima facie indicating at the complicity of the petitioner in the commission of alleged offence and hence the impugned F. I. R. is liable 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.
From perusal of the F.I.R., prima facie cognizable offences is made out at this stage against the petitioner, therefore, we do
not find any cogent reason to quash the first information report. The prayer for quashing the first information report is refused.
However, in the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner, it is directed that the petitioner shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case till the submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., subject to the restraint that he shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear as and when called upon to assist in the investigation.
With the above direction, this petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 7.10.2020 RavindraKSingh
Hari Shyam Upadhyay
State Of U.P.
B. Amit Sthalekar
Shekhar Kumar Yadav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court