Dismissed

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

Allahabad HC28 Jul 2023CRLP/11761/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR alleging cheating and offenses under IPC and SC/ST Act. The prayer for quashing was refused. Court directed petitioner to move for anticipatory bail within ten days, reserving the opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing of FIR declined and refused. Petitioner directed to move anticipatory bail application within ten days.

Ravindra Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:151839-DB

¶2

Court No. - 67

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11761 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Ravindra Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- R.P.S. Chauhan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J. Hon'ble Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi,J .

¶6

Heard Sri R.P. S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents. Perused the record.

¶7

By means of the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the assailing the legality of the FIR dated 08.10.2022 registered as Case Crime No. 288 of 2022, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 323, 504, 506 IPC and section 3(1)(d), 3(1)(r), 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Faizganj Behta, District Budaun.

¶8

Submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner is that Ravindra is one of the named accused, who has allegedly befooled the innocent informant in the name of providing government service in the railway as T.C. and cheated the informant by taking Rs. 8,00,000/- for the said purpose. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is remotely connected with the main accused-Ankit and Makhan Seth. It is next contended that there is no date, time, place and mode of payment mentioned in the F.I.R., which falsifies the entire prosecution. The F.I.R. is not an encyclopedia where every minute details has to be given. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that it is alleged in the F.I.R. that financial condition of the informant is so poor and he had managed the aforesaid amount after selling his property. Learned counsel for the petitioner in this regard has drawn the attention of court to the sale deed dated 19.11.2020 in which the land is sold away of Rs. 3,50,000/- by the mother of informant and on the same day of selling her land, she had purchased a land of Rs. 8,00,000/-. All these things do not interpret the financial condition of the informant and same cannot be taken as ground for quashing of the F.I.R.

¶9

Accordingly, the prayer for quashing the FIR is declined and

¶10

refused.

¶11

However, it is open for the petitioner, if so advised, he shall move proper anticipatory bail application before the appropriate forum, within ten days from today.

¶12

It is also made clear that the Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. The court concerned is expected to apply its robust and judicial discretion in deciding the anticipatory bail application as early as possible.

¶13

With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶14

O rder Date :- 28.7.2023 Vibha

¶15

Digitally signed by :- VIBHA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravindra 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

Ummed Pahalwan Alias Ummed Idrishi Alias Kudu Vs Union of India and 3 Others

Imran Vs Union of India and 6 Others

Sajid Ahmad Ansari Vs Government of India and 3 Others

Arun Kumar and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ompal Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kurban Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others