The High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR under various IPC sections and a direction not to arrest the petitioners. The court held that prima facie a cognizable offence was disclosed and no case was made out for interference.
The writ petition for quashing of FIR and direction not to arrest is 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. - 47
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7845 of 2021
Petitioner :- Smt Asharafi And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Yadav,R.P.S. Chauhan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Rishi Kant Rai
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.G.A.
Present writ petition has been preferred for quashing the FIR dated 13.7.2021 registered as Case Crime No.385 of 2021 under Section 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC P.S. Kotwali, District Deoria and for a direction to the respondents not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance of the aforesaid FIR.
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 petitioners to apply before the competent court for anticipatory bail/ bail as permissible under law and in accordance with law.
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 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.
Order Date :- 5.10.2021 SP/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition seeking quashing of FIR and direction not to arrest the petitioners can be allowed.
Whether sufficient material was established to interfere with the impugned first information report.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and othersReferred¶7
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¶7
M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918 · Who else cites this
Asharafi And Another
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
