Dismissed

Abhilash Narayan Alias Abhilash Yadav v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC23 Nov 2022CRLP/16939/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR and prohibition of arrest, the court observed the FIR prima facie discloses a cognizable offence. Applying Supreme Court precedents, the court dismissed the petition, leaving the petitioner to approach the competent court for bail.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed. Petitioner left to apply before competent court for anticipatory bail/bail.

Abhilash Narayan Alias Abhilash Yadav Vs State of U.P… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 47

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 16939 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Abhilash Narayan Alias Abhilash Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohit Singh,Vishal Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

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

¶5

Heard Sri Mohit Singh learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A, for the State respondents.

¶6

The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the impugned FIR dated 29.09.2022 registered as Case Crime No.0147 of 2022 under Section 304 IPC, Police Station Gujaini, District-Kanpur Nagar. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioner 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

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

¶9

Perusal of the impugned first information report prima facie reveals commission of cognizable offence. 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-V-1-19-1 (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 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.

¶12

Order Date :- 23.11.2022 n.u.

¶13

Digitally signed by NASEEM UDDIN Date: 2022.11.23 17:10:27 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Abhilash Narayan Alias Abhilash Yadav v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhilash Narayan Alias Abhilash Yadav 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

Anjay Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Krishna Kumar (Krishna Faouji) Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Sharmila Parveen Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Sumit @ Soni Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shyam Bihari Agrawal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Nadeem Alias Nadeem Akhtar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others