Dismissed

Vikas Tomar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC15 Feb 2022CRLP/598/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed the criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR. It rejected the submission that the petitioner was not primarily involved in the offense of obtaining a manipulated residential certificate and held that the FIR disclosed the commission of a cognizable offence.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition seeking quashing of the FIR dated 14.12.2021 is dismissed.

Vikas Tomar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 47

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 598 of 2022 Petitioner :- Vikas Tomar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhishek Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Syed Ali Imam

¶3

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

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Syed Ali Imam for the first informant as also learned AGA for the State.

¶5

The petition has been filed seeking quashing of the FIR dated 14.12.2021 giving rise to case Crime No.1113 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 120-B, 506 IPC, Police Station Beeta-2, District Gautam Budh Nagar.

¶6

The allegation in the first information report is that the accused afÏxing the photograph of a third person obtained a manipulated residential certificate (Nivas Pramanpatra) of the first informant from the Sub Divisional OfÏcer, Sadar, District Gautam Budh Nagar. On coming to know of the fact the first informant applied for its cancellation and after due inquiry the said residential certificate was cancelled.

¶7

It is sought to be contended that this was not done at the instance of the petitioner and that it was done by the other co-accused, namely, Satish, Jagat and Vikas Tomar. This submission cannot be accepted because the relevant portion of the FIR narrates the aforesaid names and frther goes on to mention other accomplishes, also. Moreover, it would be relevant to note that the FIR invokes also Section 120-B of the IPC.

¶8

Under the circumstances, the submission that the primary allegation in the impugned FIR does not pertain to the petitioner, cannot be accepted.

¶9

Additionally, it has been submitted that one of the accused has already been granted by the Court.

¶10

Be that as it may, in our considered opinion, the first information report discloses the commission of a cognizable offence and therefore, the writ petition seeking its quashing is without merit.

¶11

The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed.

¶12

Order Date :- 15.2.2022 RKM

¶13

Digitally signed by RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA Date: 2022.02.17 09:57:08 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vikas Tomar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas Tomar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Shakuntala Gupta Alias Sandhya and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rustam Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Gautam Jee Rai Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Hariom Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Diwan Dayanand Rawat Vs State of U.P. through Principal Secretary, Home

Smt.Amreen Vs State of U.P. thgough Secretary Home, Govt. of U.P., Luknow