Allowed

Darshan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC21 May 2025A482/42631/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application to quash proceedings under Section 174-A IPC initiated on an FIR and police report. Relying on a Division Bench ruling that cognizance on a police report is barred by Section 195(1)(a)(i) CrPC, the High Court quashed the criminal case, leaving the court free to proceed by written complaint.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Case No.907 of 2008 under Section 174A IPC, charge sheet No.83 of 2008 and cognizance order dated 15.9.2008 quashed.

Darshan Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Court No. - 84

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42631 of 2024

¶3

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

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of entire criminal proceeding against the applicant in Criminal Case No.907 of 2008 State Versus Darshan, arising out of case crime No.191 of 2008, under Sections 174A I.P.C., Police Station Chharra, District Aligarh, pending in the court of Learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st , Aligarh, as well as to quash the impugned charge sheet No.83 of 2008 dated 29.7.2008 submitted by the Investigating Officer in case crime No.191 of 2008 contained as (Annexure-No.5) to this affidavit, and quash the cognizance order dated 15.9.2008 passed by Learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st , Aligarh, contained as (Annexure-No.6) to this affidavit.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that proceedings under Section 174-A IPC against the applicant is illegal and abuse of process of Court and cognizance taken by learned Magistrate is without application of judicial mind. He further submitted that Division Bench of this Court, in the case of "Sumit and another Vs. State of U.P. and 2 others", vide order dated 08.01.2024, has observed in para 24 and 25, the same is quoted herein below:-

¶8

"24. Therefore, if the court itself cannot take cognizance of the offence u/s 174-A I.P.C. on the basis of police report, then lodging the F.I.R. u/s 174-A I.P.C. is futile, and will be against the provision of Section 195(1)(a)(i) Cr.P.C. Therefore, proceedings u/s 174-A I.P.C. can be initiated only on the basis of written complaint of the court which had initiated proceedings u/s 82 Cr.P.c. against the accused and F.I.R. is barred by Section 195(1)(a)(i) Cr.P.C.

¶9

25. This Court also holds that judgement of Single Benches of Allahabad High Court in Moti Singh Sikarwar (supra) as well as of Delhi High Court in Maneesh Goomer (supra) have not laid down correct law regarding interpretation of Section 174-A I.P.C. read with Section 195(1)(a)(i) Cr.P.C."

¶10

In view of Division Bench judgment of this Hon'ble Court,

¶11

passed on 08.01.2024, the entire criminal proceeding of Criminal Case No.907 of 2008, arising out of case crime No.191 of 2008, under Sections 174A I.P.C., Police Station Chharra, District Aligarh, pending in the court of Learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st , Aligarh, is hereby quashed .

¶12

However, it is open to the court concerned to file a written complaint against the applicants U/s 174-A I.P.C., as per Section 195(1) Cr.P.C., if there is no legal impediment.

¶13

With the aforesaid observation, the present 482 application is hereby allowed .

¶14

Order Date :- 22.5.2025 Nitin Verma

¶15

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

Darshan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Darshan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases