Manish Yadav Vs the State of U.P. and 3 Others — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

Manish Yadav Vs the State of U.P. and 3 Others — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No quashing of the FIR; the petition stands disposed of in terms of the order dated 08.1.2025 in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 168 of 2025, with the operative effect that if the petitioner is arrested in pursuance of the FIR, strict compliance with Section 41(1)(b) and Section 41-A Cr.P.C., the Arnesh Kumar guidelines and the Vimal Kumar order directions is required.

Issue for consideration

Whether the F.I.R. dated 17.9.2024 (Case Crime No. 0608 of 2024, under Sections 420, 406, 506 IPC, Police Station Badhalganj, District Gorakhpur) should be quashed. +1 more

Court's answer

The present writ petition stands disposed of in terms of the order dated 08.1.2025 passed in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 168 of 2025 (the protection order earlier granted to co-accused Suresh Yadav); consequently the FIR is not quashed.

Ratio / Principle

Per the adopted order, the prayer made to quash the FIR cannot be entertained, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani ((2017) 2 SCC 779) and Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra ((2021) SCC Online SC 315); no interference is warranted.

Key takeaways

Per the adopted order, the FIR prima facie discloses a cognizable offence against the petitioner, which is the stated basis for refusing to quash it.ratio¶12
Per the adopted order, in case of effecting the arrest of the petitioner in pursuance of the impugned FIR, the respondents/authorities shall ensure strict compliance with Section 41(1)(b) and Section 41-A Cr.P.C., the Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar ((2014) 8 SCC 273) guidelines, and the directions issued in the judgement and order dated 28.01.2021 of this Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 17732 of 2020 (Vimal Kumar and 3 Others Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others, 2021 (2) ACR 1147).ratio¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Division Bench: Vivek Kumar Birla and Nand Prabha Shukla, JJ.), Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 1418 of 2025 (Manish Yadav v. The State of U.P. and 3 Others; neutral citation 2025:AHC:11617-DB), decided 23.1.2025: the petition seeking quashing of the F.I.R. dated 17.9.2024 (Case Crime No. 0608 of 2024, under Sections 420, 406, 506 IPC, Police Station Badhalganj, District Gorakhpur) and restraint on arrest of the petitioner stands disposed of in terms of the Court's own order dated 08.1.2025 in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 168 of 2025 passed for co-accused Suresh Yadav. Per that adopted order, the prayer to quash the FIR was not entertained as the FIR prima facie discloses a cognizable offence, in view of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani ((2017) 2 SCC 779) and Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra ((2021) SCC Online SC 315); however, if arrest is effected in pursuance of the FIR, strict compliance with Section 41(1)(b) and Section 41-A Cr.P.C., the Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar ((2014) 8 SCC 273) guidelines and the directions in the Vimal Kumar order dated 28.01.2021 (2021 (2) ACR 1147) is required.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:11617-DB

Court No. - 43

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1418 of 2025

Petitioner :- Manish Yadav Respondent :- The State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla,J.

Heard Sri Rakesh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ratan Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

Present petition has been filed with the prayer to quash the F.I.R. dated 17.9.2024 registered as Case Crime No. 0608 of 2024, under Sections 420, 406, 506 IPC, Police Station Badhalganj, District Gorakhpur. Further prayer has been made to direct the respondents not to arrest the petitioner in the aforesaid case.

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that co-accused Suresh Yadav has already been granted protection vide order dated 08.1.2025 passed in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 168 of 2025. Copy of the said order has been supplied by learned counsel for the petitioner.

The aforesaid order is quoted as under:

"1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

2. Although, the prayer made in this writ petition is to quash the F.I.R. dated 17.9.2024 registered as Case Crime No. 608 of 2024, under Sections 420, 406, 506 IPC, Police Station Badhalganj, District Gorakhpur, but when the matter has been taken up, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that all the offences, complained of, are punishable up to seven years and therefore, before effecting the arrest of the petitioner, specific provisions contained in Section 41(1)(b) and Section 41-A of CrPC be strictly complied with in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in several judgments.

3. We have perused the FIR, which prima facie discloses the cognizable offence against the petitioner and therefore, the prayer made to quash the FIR cannot be entertained in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani reported in (2017) 2

SCC 779 and Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others reported in (2021) SCC Online SC 315 and as such, we are of the view that no interference is warranted.

4. However, considering the fact that all the offences, complained of in the impugned FIR, are punishable with a term up to 7 years, therefore, in case of effecting the arrest of the petitioner in pursuance of the impugned FIR, it is directed that the respondents/ authorities shall ensure that the specific provisions contained in Section 41(1)(b) and Section 41-A of Cr.P.C. and the guidelines issued by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273 as well as the directions issued in judgement and order dated 28.01.2021 of this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 17732 of 2020 (Vimal Kumar and 3 Others Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others) reported in 2021 (2) ACR 1147, be strictly complied with.

5. With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition stands disposed of."

The present petition also stands disposed of in terms of the above quoted order.

Order Date :- 23.1.2025 Madhurima

Digitally signed by :- MADHURIMA GARG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad