Dismissed

Mohd. Hanif Alias Haji Hanif Ansari v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC19 Feb 2021CRLP/1285/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought quashing of FIR and banned arrest alleging violation of Section 441 I.P.C. Bench held notice was given and encroachment confirmed via demarcation, finding prima facie misconduct, thus dismissing petition without merits.

What did the court decide?

Impugned First Information Report and order restraining arrest were dismissed without expressing opinion on merits.

Mohd. Hanif Alias Haji Hanif Ansari Vs State of U.P. and… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 48

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1285 of 2021 Petitioner :- Mohd. Hanif Alias Haji Hanif Ansari Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Swapnil Kumar,Sudhanshu Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J. Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A.

¶5

This writ petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs:

¶6

"A. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing First Information Report dated 07.01.2021 in Case Crime No.8/2021 under Section 447 I.P.C. at Police Station Jalesar, District Etah (Annexure No.1 to this writ petition).

¶7

B. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus restraining the respondents from arresting the petitioner in Case Crime No.8/2021 under Section 447 I.P.C. at Police station Jalesar, District Etah."

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that without giving notice under Section 441 I.P.C., no criminal case can be registered under Section 447 I.P.C. and, therefore, the impugned First Information Report No.0008/2021 dated 7.1.2021 under Section 447 I.P.C. P.S.Jalesar District Etah to be quashed.

¶9

We have considered the submission of the learned counsel for the parties.

¶10

From bare perusal of the impugned F.I.R., it appears that the petitioner has constructed 28 shops over public utility land and has let out 27 shops and retained one shop for his own business. Notice was given to the petitioner as mentioned in the impugned First Information Report and demarcation was also done by the authorities which confirmed the encroachment of the petitioner over the land.

¶11

Prima facie commission of offence has been made out from the bare reading of the impugned First Information Report. Therefore, we do not find any good reason to quash the impugned First Information Report. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed without expressing any opinion on merits of the case of the petitioner.

¶12

Order Date :- 19.2.2021 mt

Mohd. Hanif Alias Haji Hanif Ansari v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Hanif Alias Haji Hanif Ansari 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Rani and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kumkum and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Shankar Dev Rai Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kuldeep Tripathi Alias Lovely Vs Union of India and Another

Santosh Jaiswal and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Kumar Narayan Vs State of U P and 5 Others