Dismissed

Naresh Malik and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC10 Oct 2023CRLP/12434/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In linked criminal writ petitions seeking quashing of an FIR for cheating and forgery regarding land sale to a Shiv Mandir, the High Court held that since the FIR disclosed a cognizable offence, no quashing order could be made without investigation. The petitions were dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners' prayer to quash First Information Report is rejected; petitions dismissed.

Naresh Malik and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:195031-DB

¶2

Court No. - 43

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 12434 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Naresh Malik And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhishek Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Connected With

¶6

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 12655 of 2023

¶7

Petitioner :- Om Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhishek Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶8

Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J. Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶10

Since these writ petitions are arsing out of one and same first information report, therefore, they have been heard together and are being decided by this common order.

¶11

These writ petitions seeks quashing of the FIR dated 19.7.2023 giving rise to Case Crime No.0347 of 2023, under Sections 420 and 447 I.P.C., Police Station- Shamli, DistrictShamli.

¶12

The petitioners are vendor and the purchaser of a sale deed executed by Om Singh in favour of Naresh Malik and Smt. Munesh. The allegation in the first information report further is that land which has been sold of plot no.1204 which is land of a Shiv Mandir. It has been contended by counsel for the petitioner in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.12434 of 2023 that the land which is subject matter of sale deed in their favour is plot no.1208.

¶13

Not only this is the submission, the defence of the petitioners, it is not established from the perusal of sale deed is of which plot number. The sale deed is by boundaries.

¶14

The second contention raised is that the Manager of the Shiv Mandir has never made any complainant either of encroachment or sale of land belonging to the Shiv Mandir.

¶15

In so far as the second submission is concerned the same does not improve the case of the petitioners as there is no provision of law as to who is entitled to lodge a first information report regarding a cognizable offence.

¶16

Even earlier submission of counsel for the petitioners can only be considered after due investigation and therefore, no relief is liable to be granted on the basis of the said arguments at this stage in writ petitions which seek quashing of the first information report.

¶17

Under the circumstances, first Information Report which clearly disclose commission of cognizable offences. Therefore, prayer of the petitioners to quash the First Information Report is completely misconceived and is rejected.

¶18

Accordingly, these writ petitions are dismissed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to apply for bail/anticipatory bail.

¶19

Order Date :- 10.10.2023 Dev/-

¶20

Digitally signed by :- DEV PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Naresh Malik and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naresh Malik and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 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

Ankita Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and 8 Others

Salim @ Mohd.Salim Ahmad And Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Malay Sonkar Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Rajan Garg and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Faizan @ Faizan Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Soni Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others