Disposed

Shahnabaj Siddiqui v. State of Up and 3 Others

Allahabad HC6 Dec 2024CRLP/22310/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused the petitioner's prayer to quash an FIR registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 and 506 IPC. The Court held that the FIR prima facie disclosed cognizable offences and followed Supreme Court precedents on the standards for quashing FIRs. The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to consider bail applications in appropriate courts.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; prayer for quashing FIR refused.

Shahnabaj Siddiqui vs State of Up and 3 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:191676-DB

¶2

Court No. - 47

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 22310 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Shahnabaj Siddiqui Respondent :- State Of Up And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohammad Waseem Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J. Hon'ble Surendra Singh-I,J.

¶6

Sri Zafar Abbas, Advocate has filed vakalatnama on behalf of respondent No.4, today in Court, which is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA for the State-respondent, learned counsel for the respondent No.4 and perused the record.

¶8

The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer to quash the FIR dated 17.11.2024 in Case Crime No.135 of 2024, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Milak Khanam, District Rampur.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from the allegations made in the first information report, prima facie no offence, complained of, is disclosed against the petitioner and as such, the impugned first information report is liable to be quashed.

¶10

Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the respondent no.4 has submitted that from the allegations made in the first information report, prima facie offence is clearly disclosed against the petitioner, therefore, the impugned first information report can not be quashed in view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani reported in (2017) 2 SCC 779, Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and Others reported in (2021) SCC Online SC 315 and in a recent decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No. 843 of 2024, Directorate Enforcement Vs. Niraj Tyagi and others .

¶11

Having considered the rival submission made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations made in the FIR and the relevant law cited by learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the respondent no.4 and the fact that impugned first information report discloses cognizable offence against the petitioner, we are of the opinion that the impugned first information report can not be quashed.

¶12

The prayer for quashing the impugned first information report is therefore refused.

¶13

However in case, the petitioner moves an application for anticipatory bail/ regular bail before the appropriate court, his bail application shall be considered and disposed of as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law.

¶14

With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition is disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 6.12.2024 Amit

¶16

Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shahnabaj Siddiqui v. State of Up and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahnabaj Siddiqui v. State of Up and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sushama Gond vs State of Up and 3 Others

Smt. Zahara Ansari and Another vs State of Up and 3 Others

Sabir Yar vs State of Up and 2 Others

Ankur Srivastava vs State of Up and 2 Others

Deepak Mishra vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rahul vs State of Up and 2 Others