Dismissed¶¶12

Tasavvar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC21 Jan 2025A482/1776/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court; Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing application dismissed; false implication is a triable factual issue; inherent powers to be exercised sparingly; unauthorized sale of diesel; raid by Supply Inspector; recovery of 150 liters diesel; purchase receipt timing credibility; no FSL/scientific evidence contention; Tasavvar v. State of U.P. and Another; Justice Vinod Diwakar; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:12338; decided 21.1.2025.

What did the court decide?

On perusal of the FIR and the documents annexed to the application, a cognizable offense is prima facie made out against the applicant. ¶¶10

Tasavvar vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶¶12

Issue for consideration

Whether the inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be invoked to quash the criminal proceedings against the applicant, who pleads false implication and absence of any scientific/FSL evidence supporting the allegation of unauthorized sale of diesel.

¶¶7

Court's answer

On perusal of the FIR and the documents annexed to the application, a cognizable offense is prima facie made out against the applicant.

¶¶10

Ratio / Principle

Assertions of false implication raised by the applicant are factual issues that require adjudication based on evidence and cannot be conclusively determined in proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶¶10

Key takeaways

The inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. are to be exercised sparingly and with caution, primarily to prevent abuse of the process of the court or to secure the ends of justice.ratio¶¶11
No sufficient grounds were made out to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in this case.ratio¶¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Application U/S 482 No. 1776 of 2025, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar, J.), Order Date 21.1.2025; Neutral Citation No. 2025:AHC:12338. The applicant, arraigned in an FIR alleging unauthorized sale of diesel from his premises (150 liters allegedly recovered in a raid by the Supply Inspector at 03:00 p.m.), sought quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C., pleading false implication, a purchase receipt No. 3794 dated 27.07.2020 stamped at 03:30 p.m., ownership of a five-kilowatt generator necessitating diesel storage, and absence of any FSL or scientific evidence. The State opposed, pointing to the timing discrepancy of the receipt vis-a-vis the raid. Held: a cognizable offense is prima facie made out on the FIR and annexed documents; assertions of false implication are factual issues requiring adjudication on evidence and cannot be conclusively determined in Section 482 proceedings; inherent powers are to be exercised sparingly and with caution; no sufficient grounds were made out to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction. The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was dismissed as devoid of merits.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:12338

¶2

Court No. - 76

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1776 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Tasavvar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Virendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State, and perused the record.

¶7

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. It is contended that the applicant purchased diesel for personal use, as evidenced by purchase receipt No. 3794 dated 27.07.2020, indicating the purchase occurred at 03:30 p.m. Furthermore, the applicant owns a generator set with a capacity of five kilowatts, for which the storage of diesel is necessary. It is further argued that no FSL analysis or any other scientific evidence has been conducted to substantiate the allegations made against the applicant.

¶8

On the other hand, the learned A.G.A. opposes the application, contending that the applicant is involved in the unauthorized sale of diesel from his premises. It is submitted that during a raid conducted by the Supply Inspector at 03:00 p.m., 150 liters of diesel were recovered from the applicant's premises. The purchase receipt relied upon by the applicant is stamped at 03:30 p.m., which is after the time of the raid, raising questions regarding its credibility.

¶9

Consideration the submissions made by the learned counsel for

¶10

the parties, upon perusal of the FIR and the documents annexed to the application, it's observed prima facie that a cognizable offense is made out against the applicant. The assertions of false implication raised by the applicant are factual issues that require adjudication based on evidence and cannot be conclusively determined in proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶11

It is well-settled that the inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. are to be exercised sparingly and with caution, primarily to prevent abuse of the process of the court or to secure the ends of justice. In the instant case, no sufficient grounds have been made out to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶12

In view of the foregoing, the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is devoid of merits, and is accordingly dismissed.

¶13

Order Date :- 21.1.2025 Anil K. Sharma

¶14

Justice Vinod Diwakar

¶15

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

Tasavvar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tasavvar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt Rinki Kashyap and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt Neha and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt Babita and Another vs State of Up and 3 Others

Falak Jahan and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Toheed vs State of Up

Smt Ruchi and Another vs State of Up and 4 Others