The High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR and stay on coercive action. The court found the FIR prima facie revealed a cognizable offence. The matter was disposed of after the petitioner sought withdrawal with liberty to apply for bail, without expressing any opinion on merits.
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. - 47
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 3373 of 2021
Petitioner :- Mohammad Sarif Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Satya Prakash Pandey,Ashish Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Pradeep Kumar Upadhyay
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri S.A. Murtaza, learned A.G.A and Shri Pradeep Kumar Upadhyay, learned counsel for the complainant/respondent no.3.
Present writ petition has been filed seeking following reliefs:-
"(i) To call for the records and to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 04.09.2020 bearing Case Crime No.0397 of 2020 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406 I.P.C., Police Station Civil Lines, District Aligarh (Annexure No.1 to this writ petition) so far as it relates to petitioner only.
(ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents/police not to take any coercive action against the petitioner and arrest and harassment of the petitioner may also be stayed in case crime no.0397 of 2020 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406 I.P.C., Police Station Civil Lines, District Aligarh.
(iii) To issue any other suitable writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the fact and circumstances of the instant case.
(iv) To award cost of the writ petition in favour of the petitioner."
Perusal of the impugned first information report prima facie reveals commission of cognizable offence. Therefore, in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and ors vs. Bhajan Lal and others, 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335 and M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of maharashtra AIR 2021 SC 1918, no case has been made out for interference under law.
Confronted with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner wants to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to apply for anticipatory bail/bail.
Learned A.G.A. has no objection to the aforesaid request of the petitioner.
In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of with
liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy as available to him under the law.
It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on merits of the case.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such 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 (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.
The concerned Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerised copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 24.8.2021 RKP
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned F.I.R. under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406 I.P.C. calls for interference in criminal proceedings.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to withdrawal of the writ petition with liberty to apply for bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Haryana and ors vs. Bhajan Lal and othersReferred¶11
State of Haryana and ors vs. Bhajan Lal and others, 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335 · Who else cites this
M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of maharashtraReferred¶11
M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of maharashtra AIR 2021 SC 1918 · Who else cites this
Mohammad Sarif
State Of U.P.
Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
Ram Krishna Gautam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
