Disposed

Ramesh Bhonorimal Gupta and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC18 Nov 2022CRLP/15586/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR and protection from arrest. It held that no case was made out for interference following Supreme Court precedents and declined to entertain the petition as co-accused had already been granted anticipatory bail.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of without entertaining the prayers for quashing of FIR or stay on arrest.

Ramesh Bhonorimal Gupta and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 47

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 15586 of 2022 Petitioner :- Ramesh Bhonorimal Gupta and 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prashant Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Rajesh Kumar Shukla

¶3

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.

¶4

The supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. Heard Shri P.K. Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners; learned A.G.A for the State respondents and Shri Rajesh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the informant.

¶5

The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 12.4.2022 registered as Case Crime No.0112 of 2022 (State vs. Ramesh Bhonorimal Gupta and others) under Sections 406, 504, 506 IPC, 1860, Police Station Baksa, District Jaunpur. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioners in the aforesaid case.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned FIR has been lodged on false/vexatious/mischievous allegations. During the investigation Sections 447, 468, 120B IPC have been added. In support of his submission, learned counsel for the petitioners states that the aforesaid FIR registered as Case Crime No.112 of 2022 has also been challenged by the co-accused by filing Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 CR.P.C. No.9841 of 2022 (Ramanuj Bhaddar and another vs. State of UP) in which an interim protection has been granted in their favour by this Court on 12.10.2022. He submits that similar indulgence may also be accorded in the present matter.

¶7

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR, which discloses cognizable offence.

¶8

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 and in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.3262/2021 (Leelavati Devi @ Leelawati & another

¶9

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

Considering the facts and circumstances, we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition for quashing the impugned FIR as the co-accused have already been accorded anticipatory bail by this Court on 12.10.2022. However, it is always open to the petitioners to apply for anticipatory bail/bail as permissible under law and in accordance with law.

¶11

With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶12

Order Date :- 18.11.2022 RKP

¶13

Digitally signed by RAKESH KUMAR PATEL Date: 2022.11.19 10:51:27 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ramesh Bhonorimal Gupta and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Bhonorimal Gupta and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 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

Sharook Khan Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Julfikar Vs State of U.P.

Harendra Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Dharmveer Vs State of U.P. and Another

Akhilesh Nishad Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ram Karan Katara Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others