This single-paragraph order dismisses a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC. The court held that the petitioners defense was improper and the allegations disclosed cognizable offences, following a precedent where a co-accused's petition was 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.
Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 822 of 2023
Petitioner :- Sechan Yadav And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prakash Sharma,Chandra Prakash Misra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Naveen Kumar Yadav,Saurabh Yadav
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Surendra Singh-I,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A for the State respondents.
The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 23.12.2022 registered as Case Crime No. 599 of 2022 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Cant, District Varanasi. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioner in the aforesaid case.
Learned counsel for the petitioner could not dispute with the fact that Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 321 of 2023 (Raju Yadav vs. State of U.P. and others) filed by the co- accused has already been dismissed vide order of this Court dated 13.1.2023. The aforesaid order is quoted as under:-
"Shri N.K. Yadav has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the first informant which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The instant writ petition seeks quashing of the FIR dated 23.12.2022 giving rise to Case Crime No. 0599 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station- Cantt., District- Varanasi.
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.
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.
The writ petition is therefore dismissed, without prejudice to the right of the
petitioner to apply for bail/anticipatory bail."
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the role of the petitioner in the present petition is different.
After perusal of the first information report we do not find any good ground to take different view of the matter.
In such view of the matter, present petition also stands dismissed in terms of the aforesaid order dated 13.1.2023.
Order Date :- 21.3.2023 Lalit Shukla
Digitally signed by :- LALIT KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioners for quashing of FIR can distinguish their role from co-accused whose similar writ petition was dismissed, given that FIR allegations disclose cognizable offences.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Raju Yadav vs. State of U.P.Distinguished¶7
Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 321 of 2023 (Raju Yadav vs. State of U.P. and others)
Sechan Yadav
State Of U.P.
Vivek Kumar Birla
Surendra Singh-I
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
