Disposed

Suddu Khan @ Abu Said v. State of U.P. through S.P., Chandauli and Another

Allahabad HC25 Aug 2021CRLP/5553/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Pettioner sought quashing of FIR and non-arrest direction under U.P. Gangster Act. Court found offences cognizable under Bhajan Lal principles. Petitioner requested withdrawal with liberty for bail. Court dismissed petition with liberty to apply for bail, leaving merits untouched.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to apply for avail the remedy of anticipatory bail or bail under law.

Suddu Khan @ Abu Said Vs State of U.P. through… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 47

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5553 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Suddu Khan @ Abu Said Respondent :- State Of U.P. Through S.P., Chandauli And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Sudarshan Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Archana Singh, learned AGA.

¶6

Present writ petition has been filed seeking following reliefs:-

¶7

"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the FIR dated 7.4.2021 in Case Crime No.57 of 2021 U/S 3 (1) of U.P. Gangster and Ante Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Saiyad Raza, District Chandauli.

¶8

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent nos.1 and 2 not to arrest the petitioner in pursuance of the FIR dated 7.4.2021 in Case Crime No.57 of 2021 U/S 3 (1) of U.P. Gangster and Ante Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Saiyad Raza, District Chandauli."

¶9

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.

¶10

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.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has no objection to the aforesaid request of the petitioner.

¶12

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.

¶13

It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on merits of the case.

¶14

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.

¶15

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.

¶16

Order Date :- 25.8.2021 SP/

Suddu Khan @ Abu Said v. State of U.P. through S.P., Chandauli and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suddu Khan @ Abu Said v. State of U.P. through S.P., Chandauli and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammad Sarif Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rahul @ Rahul Chaudhary Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Krishpal @ Krishna and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Preeti and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

S.P. Chaubey Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Monu Bhartiya Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others