Ravi Chandra @ Bablu Yadav and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Court No. - 45 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 16332 of 2023 Petitioner :- Ravi Chandra @ Bablu Yadav And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Naresh Singh,Shive Datta Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Manvendra Singh Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

¶1Heard Shri Anuj Datta, holding brief of Shri Shive Datta Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Manvendra Singh, learned counsel for the informant, Shri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A for the State-respondents, and perused the record.

¶2The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the impugned First Information Report dated 5.9.2023, registered as Case Crime No.196 of 2023, under Sections 420, 406, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station-Hathgaon, District Fatehpur. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioners in the aforesaid case.

¶3Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners have not committed any offence and the FIR has been lodged with malafide intention to put pressure on the petitioners. The ingredients of the offence as alleged are not complete and are missing, therefore, the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed.

¶4Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. submit that a bare glance over the FIR clearly discloses that cognizable offence has been committed by the petitioners as the petitioners by playing fraud have taken money from the informant by promising him service in a foreign country, whereas tourist visa was provided. Submission is that the petitioners are working as a gang and are committing public fraud, therefore, cognizable offence is made out.

¶5Prima-facie, on plain reading of the contents of the impugned FIR, we find that the commission of a cognizable offence is made out. The arguments being raised by learned counsel for the petitioners is nothing but a defence of the petitioners that cannot be considered for the purpose of quashing of the impugned FIR. The petitioners have also failed to bring their case within the parameters of State of Haryana and others Vs. Bhajan Lal and others, 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335. Therefore, the extra-ordinary power vests with this Court cannot be invoked in the facts-circumstances of the case.

¶6The writ petition is devoid of merits, and is accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 27.10.2023 Anil K. Sharma High Court of Judicature at Allahabad