Writ petition challenging quashing of Section 386/419/420 IPC FIR on false allegations. Court finds no ground for quashing and dismisses petition, rejecting claims about Section 156(3) application.
Quashing of FIR and pending application 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.
$~10
SANJAY KAPUR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Shakti Mann, Advocate.
versus
STATE AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Ms. Rupali Bandhopadhya, ASC for State with Mr. Abhijeet Kumar and Mr. Sagar Mehlawat, Advocates alongwith ASI Faiyaz Ahmad, P.S. Sarita Vihar.
Mr. Gaurav Kakar, Advocate for complainant/respondent No.2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI O R D E R
% 18.07.2024
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/07/2025 at 04:06:26
MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J
JULY 18, 2024 ga
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/07/2025 at 04:06:26
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should quash the FIR on the ground that allegations made in the complaint are patently false.
Whether an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was ever filed seeking non-registration of the FIR.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Sanjay Kapur
State
Manoj Kumar Ohri
As recorded by the court registry
A constitutional writ petition in a criminal context, most commonly habeas corpus or a challenge to an FIR or detention order.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Manoj Kumar Ohri
Parties & counsel
