Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition seeking quashing of FIR and prohibition of arrest. Bench held that prima facie cognizable offences are disclosed and no case for interference exists, dismissing the petition.
Quashing of FIR and prayer not to arrest the petitioner were dismissed.
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:234941-DB
Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 17572 of 2023
Petitioner :- Akilesh Kumar Alias Akhilesh Jaiswal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Murli Dhar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.
1 . Heard Sri M.D. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ratan Singh, learned A.G.A for the State respondents.
2 . The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 16.6.2022, registered as Case Crime No. 72 of 2022,, under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506, 419, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Jogia Udaipur, District Siddharth Nagar. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioner in the aforesaid case.
3 . Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is not even named in the FIR and his name has figured in the statement of the informant during course of investigation and against two co-accused persons named in the FIR charge-sheet has been submitted and therefore, no offence whatsoever is made out against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the matter relates to civil dispute, which is being given colour of criminal prosecution. It is submitted that the name of the petitioner has been added by way of improvement with the help of the Investigating OfÏcer and has no legs to stand.
4 . Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR, which discloses cognizable offence. It is next submitted that non-bailable warrants have already been issued against the petitioners on 2.12.2022, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 and 506 and subsequently Section 406 IPC was also added against the petitioner herein and as such, all such happened during course of investigation and no case for interference is made out and question of part quashing of the FIR does not arise.
5 . We find substance in the arguments of learned AGA and perusal of the impugned first information report prima facie also reveals commission of cognizable offence.
6 . 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 in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.3262/2021 (Leelavati Devi @ Leelawati & another vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh) decided on 07.10.2021, no case has been made out for interference with the impugned first information report.
7 . Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 12.12.2023 Abhishek
Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should quash the FIR and prohibit the arrest of the petitioner who claims the case is a civil dispute disguised as a criminal prosecution.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and othersFollowed¶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 MaharashtraFollowed¶11
M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918 · Who else cites this
Leelavati Devi @ Leelawati & another vs. the State of Uttar PradeshFollowed¶11
Leelavati Devi @ Leelawati & another vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh, Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.3262/2021
Akilesh Kumar Alias Akhilesh Jaiswal
State Of U.P.
Vivek Kumar Birla
Vinod Diwakar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
