In this criminal miscellaneous writ petition, the High Court dismissed the petitioner's plea for quashing of the FIR and prohibition of arrest. The court held that a prima facie case was established under cited precedents, precluding interference at this stage.
The writ petition for quashing the FIR and prohibiting arrest was dismissed.
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. - 46
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5789 of 2021
Petitioner :- Mahboob Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Kant Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A.
This writ petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs:
" (a) Issue a writ, order or direction in nature of certiorari quashing impugned first information report dated 23.03.2021 in Case Crime No.104 of 2021 under sections 420, 406, 504, 506 I.P.C. police station Civil Line District Rampur lodged by the respondent No.4.
(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to arrest the petitioner in Case Crime No.104 of 2021 under sections 420, 406, 504, 506 I.P.C. police station Civil Line District Rampur "
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 others 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 with the impugned first information report.
Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed leaving it open for the petitioner to apply before the competent court for anticipatory bail/ bail as permissible under law and in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 30.7.2021/vkg
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the FIR and seeking prohibition of arrest should be allowed.
Whether the First Information Report discloses the commission of a cognizable offence warranting non-interference.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and othersReferred¶9
State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and others, 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335 · Who else cites this
M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of MaharashtraReferred¶9
M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918 · Who else cites this
Mahboob
State Of U.P.
3 Others
Surya Prakash Kesarwani
Piyush Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
