Dismissed

Ratnesh Urf Chhotalli v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC14 Oct 2022CRLP/14143/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Writ Petition seeking quashing of FIR and prohibition on arrest was dismissed. Court held that correctness of allegations is to be tested post-investigation per Bhajan Lal and other precedents, making no case for FIR quashing at this stage.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; liberty to apply for anticipatory bail/bail in appropriate proceeding; contentions left open.

Ratnesh Urf Chhotalli Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 47

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 14143 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Ratnesh Urf Chhotalli Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shiv Sharan Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Surendra Singh-I,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Shiv Sharan Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A, for the State respondents.

¶6

The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the impugned FIR dated 07.9.2022 registered as Case Crime No.268 of 2022 under Sections 452, 504, 506, 120B, 376 IPC, Police Station Gauda, District Aligarh. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioners in the aforesaid case.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned FIR has been lodged on false/vexatious/mischievous allegations, and no offences are made out against the petitioner.

¶8

Shri G.P. Singh, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR, which discloses cognizable offence.

¶9

The correctness of the allegations would have to be tested on the basis of the materials collected during the course of investigation as by insertion of notification No.1058/79-V1-19-1 (Ka)-20-2018 dated 6th June 2019 and 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 and in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.3262/2021 (Leelavati Devi @ Leelawati & another vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh ) decided on 07.10.2021 , no case has been made out for interference with the impugned first information report.

¶10

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.

¶11

It is made clear that we have not adjudicated the

¶12

contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner and the same are left open for the petitioner to raise at an appropriate stage in an appropriate proceeding, in accordance with law.

¶13

Order Date :- 14.10.2022 RKP

¶14

Digitally signed by RAKESH KUMAR PATEL Date: 2022.10.17 09:02:04 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ratnesh Urf Chhotalli v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ratnesh Urf Chhotalli v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Mohd. Imran and 11 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Narma and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Surendra Pal Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Gurjeet Singh Chawla Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shyam Vishwakarma and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Uma Shankar Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and 10 Others