Dismissed¶10

Shashi Kant Bharti v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC18 Jan 2022CRLP/263/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Anjani Kumar Mishra and Deepak Verma, JJ.; order dated 18.1.2022) dismisses writ petition seeking quashing of F.I.R. dated 14.09.2021, Case Crime No.0267 of 2021, under Sections 409, 417, 420 and 506 I.P.C., P.S. Ali Nagar, District Chandauli. Holds that the F.I.R. discloses ingredients of an offence; that absence of prior sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C. is not a ground to quash an F.I.R. in writ jurisdiction because the provision bars only cognizance by a court; and that the accused's defence is irrelevant at the F.I.R.-quashing stage. Liberty to apply for bail expressly preserved.

What did the court decide?

On perusal of the F.I.R., the Court found that it contains the ingredients of an offence, and therefore the F.I.R. cannot be quashed. ¶9

Shashi Kant Bharti Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 47

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 263 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Shashi Kant Bharti Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vishnu Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. on behalf of State.

¶6

The instant writ petition seeks quashing of the first information report dated 14.09.2021 giving rise to Case Crime No.0267 of 2021, under Sections 409, 417, 420 and 506 I.P.C., P.S. Ali Nagar, District Chandauli.

¶7

The contention of counsel for the petitioner is that the case has also been registered against him under Section 409 I.P.C. admitting the petitioner to be a public servant and yet cognizance has been taken and therefore, the F.I.R. which has been filed without obtaining prior sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C., is liable to be quashed.

¶8

Various other grounds have also been argued, which, in our considered opinion, are the defence of the petitioner. The defence of the petitioner cannot be taken into account while dealing with the writ petition for quashing the first information report and what is required to be looked into is only as to whether the allegations constituted an offence or not.

¶9

Upon hearing counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the F.I.R., we find that it contains ingredients of offence. The plea that the first information report has been lodged without obtaining prior sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C., is not available to the petitioner in a writ petition seeking quashing of the F.I.R. because Section 197 Cr.P.C. only bars the cognizance by a court in case prior sanction has not been obtained. Under the circumstances and since the allegations in the F.I.R. reveal the ingredients of an offence, the F.I.R. cannot be quashed.

¶10

The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to apply for bail.

¶11

Order Date :- 18.1.2022 Meenu

¶12

Digitally signed by MEENU SINGH Date: 2022.01.19 14:55:50 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shashi Kant Bharti v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shashi Kant Bharti v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shyam Sundar Vs State of U.P. and 10 Others

Umesh Chandra Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Manoj Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P Thru Secretary Home Lknw. and Others

Rehan Ali Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Jasveer and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Seeta Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others