Dismissed

Rishabh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC9 Oct 2023CRLP/10326/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, relying on a co-accused's prior petition which was dismissed due to serious allegations, dismissed the present petition for quashing of an FIR involving cheating and forgery. The court held that the allegations disclosed cognizable offences and the petitioner was a direct beneficiary.

What did the court decide?

Petition for quashing of FIR dismissed; prayer not to arrest the petitioner also rejected.

Rishabh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:193493-DB

¶2

Court No. - 45

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10326 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Rishabh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ramesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Kundan Rai

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Ramesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Kundan Rai, learned counsel appearing for the informant and Sri Vibhav Ojha, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State respondents.

¶7

The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the impugned FIR dated 10.6.2023 registered as Case Crime No. 102 of 2023, under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, Police Station Saiyadraja, District Chandauli. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioner in the aforesaid case.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner could not dispute with the fact that Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 12586 of 2023 (Shivam Kumar Verma vs. State of U.P. and others) filed by the co-accused has already been dismissed vide order of this Court dated 10.8.2023. The aforesaid order is quoted as under:-

¶9

"1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶10

The instant writ petition seeks quashing of the FIR dated 10.06.2023 giving rise to Case Crime No.0102 of 2023, under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station- Saiyad Raza, District- Chandauli.

¶11

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and upon a perusal of the record, we find that the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner are his defence, which cannot be looked into while dealing with a writ petition seeking quashing of a first information report.

¶12

Moreover, the allegations made in the First Information Report clearly disclose commission of cognizable offences and the allegations are serious in nature. Therefore, prayer of the petitioner to quash the First Information Report is completely misconceived and is rejected.

¶13

The writ petition is therefore dismissed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to apply for bail/anticipatory bail."

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the role of the petitioner in the present petition is different.

¶15

Admittedly, the petitioner has taken loan in the present case on the gold certified by the Goldsmith registered by the Bank and the petitioner is direct beneficiary in the present case.

¶16

After perusal of the first information report we do not find any good ground to take different view of the matter.

¶17

In such view of the matter, present petition also stands dismissed in terms of the aforesaid order dated 10.8.2023.

¶18

Order Date :- 9.10.2023 Lalit Shukla

¶19

Digitally signed by :- LALIT KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rishabh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rishabh 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saddam Khan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Narendra Upadhyay Alias Narendra Deo Upadhyay and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt.Sudha Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Raj Kumar Shukla and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Prem Shanker and 10 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Vedan Singh and 16 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others