This mismatch of the writ petition filed for quashing an FIR and prohibiting harassment. The court, after finding prima facie evidence of cognizable offence, dismissed the petition, leaving bail applications to the competent court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7021 of 2022
Petitioner :- Amrit Singh And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prashant Singh,Mukesh Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.G.A.
This writ petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs:
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned First Information Report dated 6.3.2022 registered as Case Crime No. 60 of 2022, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506, 376-D IPC and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Acchalda, District- Auraiya (Annexure No. 1 to this writ petition).
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to arrest or harass the petitioners in pursuance of impugned First Information Report."
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR, which discloses cognizable offence.
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 Leelavati Devi @ Leelawati & Anr. Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh , in Special Leave To Appeal (Crl.) No. 3262 of 2021 decided on 7.10.2021, no case has been made out for interference with the impugned first information report.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed leaving it open for the petitioners to apply before the competent court for bail/anticipatory bail as permissible in law and in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 9.6.2022 A.K.Srivastava
Digitally signed by ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.06.09 15:53:18 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the impugned First Information Report disclosing cognizable offences be quashed.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and othersReferred¶11
State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and others, 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335 · Who else cites this
M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of MaharashtraReferred¶11
M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918 · Who else cites this
Leelavati Devi @ Leelawati & Anr. Vs. The State of Uttar PradeshReferred¶11
Leelavati Devi @ Leelawati & Anr. Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh, in Special Leave To Appeal (Crl.) No. 3262 of 2021 decided on 7.10.2021
Amrit Singh And 2 Others
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
Sanjay Kumar Pachori
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
