Said Ahmad and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Court No. - 9 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 4469 of 2023 Petitioner :- Said Ahmad And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shankar Lal Pandey,Alok Kr. Misra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J. Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma,J.

¶1Heard Shri Alok Kr. Misra, the learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Badrul Hasan, the learned A.G.A.-I for the State respondents.

¶2The petitioner in the present writ petition is seeking quashing of the First Information Report dated registered as F.I.R. No. 0144 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 447 & 409 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Jarwal Road, District Bahraich, with all its consequential effects and with a further prayer, not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance of the said First Information Report.

¶3The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that no offence against the petitioners is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment.

¶4Per contra, the learned A.G.A.-I has contended that from the allegations made in the FIR prima facie offence is made out against the petitioners. The innocence of the petitioners cannot be adjudged at the pre trial stage. Therefore, the petitioners do not deserve any indulgence.

¶5Perusal of the impugned first information report prima facie reveals commission of cognizable offence. Therefore, in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and others, 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335 and M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918, no case has been made out for interference with the impugned first information report.

¶6Having gone through the allegations made in the F.I.R. this Court is of the view that the allegations in the F.I.R. do disclose commission of cognizable offence and/ therefore no ground is made out warranting interference by this Court. Thus, the prayer for quashing of F.I.R. is refused.

¶7However, the petitioners are directed to appear and surrender before the court below and apply for bail within four weeks from today, and their prayer for bail shall be considered expeditiously by the court below in accordance with law after hearing the Public Prosecutor.

¶8With the aforesaid observations, this petition stands disposed of. Order Date :- 9.6.2023 S.Verma High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench