Dismissed

Natthu v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC7 Apr 2021CRLP/2801/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court dismissed a writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR. While noting the petitioner's criminal history and claims of false implication, the bench held that the allegations did not clearly indicate the absence of a cognizable offence. The petition was refused, but bail was considered if the petitioner surrenders within 30 days.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing of FIR refused; writ petition dismissed; conditional bail offered upon surrender within 30 days.

Natthu Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 49

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 2801 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Natthu Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pankaj Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the respondents and perused the record.

¶6

The present writ petition has been filed by the petitoner for quashing the first information report dated 4.3.2021 registered as Case Crime No. 107 of 2021, under Section 2/3 U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S.- Soron, District Kasganj with further prayer not to arrest the petitioner in pursuance of the aforesaid FIR.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the criminal history of sixteen cases have been shown against the petitioner in which the petitioner has falsely been implicated by the police. In four cases, the petitioner has been acquitted and in other cases the petitioner is on bail and three cases of Gunda Act has also been slapped upon the petitioner. The impugned F.I.R. has been lodged against two real brothers including the petitioner. Neither the petitioner is a member of any gang nor involved in any Anti Social Activities. The impugned F.I.R. has been lodged only for the purpose of harassment,therefore the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for quashing the FIR and argued that there is long criminal history of the petitioner. From the allegation made in the first information report it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the petitioner, therefore the impugned FIR is not liable to be quashed.

¶9

The criminal history of sixteen cases has been shown against the petitioner. From the allegation made in the first information report it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstance of the case and submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, we do not find it a fit case for quashing the impugned FIR, therefore the prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused and the writ petition is dismissed .

¶11

However, if the petitioner appears and surrenders before the court below within a period of 30 days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶12

Order Date :- 7.4.2021/A.

Natthu v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Natthu 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

Anta Singhal and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Wakil Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Priyanka and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Kamlesh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Amit Bhojwal @ Amit Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Danish @ Kala Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others