Petitioner sought quashing of FIR; counsel withdrew to seek protection under CrPC Sec 41-A. Court found FIR prima facie discloses cognizable offence and rejected quashing plea, noting authorities must comply with Sec 41-A.
Petition consigned to records; no quashing granted; compliance with Section 41-A CrPC directed.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:215277-DB
Court No. - 46
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 17466 of 2023
Petitioner :- Vimal Kumar Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sushil Kumar Srivastava,Nagesh Kumar Dwivedi,Virendra Kumar Sonkar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J. Hon'ble Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi,J.
Although prayer made in this writ petition is to quash the First Information Report registered as Case Crime No.0188 of 2023, under Sections 417, 418, 419, 420, 506 IPC, Police Station - Merapur, District - Fatehgarh, but at the time when the matter is taken up learned counsel for the petitioner confines his relief to grant of protection under section 41-A of Code of Criminal Procedure.
We have perused the First Information Report, which prima facie discloses commissioning of cognizable offence and, therefore, the prayer made to quash F.I.R. otherwise cannot be entertained in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani, (2017) 2 SCC 779 and Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, (2021) SCC Online SC 315 .
It is, however, provided that in the event provisions of Section 41A of the Code of Criminal Procedure are attracted in the facts of the case, the authorities shall ensure its compliance.
Subject to observations made above, this petition is consigned to records.
Order Date :- 8.11.2023 Zafar
Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to grant protection under section 41-A CrPC or quash the FIR.
Whether FIR disclosing cognizable offence can be quashed.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah JellaniReferred¶7
State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani, (2017) 2 SCC 779 · Who else cites this
Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and OthersReferred¶7
Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, (2021) SCC Online SC 315 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Vimal Kumar Yadav
State Of U.P.
3 Others
Ashwani Kumar Mishra
Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
