Two-judge bench dismissed a criminal writ petition challenging the FIR under Section 304 IPC. The court found cognizable offence made out and quashed the petition without expressing opinion on merits.
Writ petition dismissed; petitioner directed to apply for bail in accordance with law.
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. - 48
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 635 of 2021
Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Yogendra Kumar Yadav,Sudhakar Yadav
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J. Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.
None appears for the petitioner, even in the revised call.
This writ petition has been filed, praying for the following relief:-
"(A) Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F.I.R. no.0228/2020 dated 26.12.2020 (Annexure no.01) Lodged under section 304 Of I.P.C. 1860, State versus Alok Kumar Yadav and 04 others, at Police Station-Adalhaat, District-Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh
(B) Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of Manadamus commanding and directing to the Respondents/police authority not to arrest the petitioner pursuant to the impugned F.I.R. and may not interfere in his peaceful functioning as Regional Transport in R.T.O. Office at District-Sonebhadra, U.P. and further may not initiate any coercive action against him during the prosecution proceedings of the same case as well as durig the pendency of the present writ petition before this Hon'ble Court."
On bare reading of the impugned FIR, we find that the commission of cognizable offence is made out, therefore, no ground extists to quash the impugned FIR, in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and others Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 AIR 604 and State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jeelani and others, 2017(2) SCC 779 .
For the reasons aforestated and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the writ petition is dismissed leaving it open to the petitioner to apply for bail in accordance with law.
Date :- 3.2.2021 mt
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the complainant had sufficient ground to file an FIR under section 304 of the IPC.
Whether the facts stated in the FIR warrant the quashing of the FIR under article 226 of the Constitution.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Haryana and others Vs. Bhajan LalReferred¶10
State of Haryana and others Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 AIR 604 · Who else cites this
State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jeelani and othersReferred¶10
State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jeelani and others, 2017(2) SCC 779 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rajesh Kumar Yadav
State Of U.P.
State of Haryana and others
State of Telangana
Surya Prakash Kesarwani
Shamim Ahmed
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
