Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Abdul Ahad vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|30 September, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 47
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8733 of 2021 Petitioner :- Abdul Ahad Respondent :- State of U.P and 2 others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sushil Kumar Tewari,Braham Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State respondents.
The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 04.9.2021 registered as Case Crime No.129 of 2021 under Sections 294, 511, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Gaishaheed, District Moradabad. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioner in the aforesaid case.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR and the entire allegation is false and frivolous. Just to pressurise the father of the petitioner, the present FIR has been lodged against the petitioner. Admittedly, the petitioner is a minor boy aged about 16 years and as per High School certificate, his date of birth is 21.5.2005. He has passed his High School examination in the year 2021 itself and at present, he is a study of Class-
XI. There is no previous criminal history of the petitioner.
Perusal 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.
Confronted with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioner states that for the offences, as complained in the impugned FIR, maximum punishment is seven years and as such, the petitioner is entitled for the benefit of Section 41A of Cr.P.C.
In the facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to invoke the remedy as available in law, specially recourse to Juvenile Justice Board.
It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on merits of the case.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioner alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 30.9.2021 RKP Digitally signed by JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI Date: 2021.09.30 16:57:53 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by RAM KRISHNA GAUTAM Date: 2021.09.30 16:58:33 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Abdul Ahad vs State Of U P And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
30 September, 2021
Judges
  • Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
Advocates
  • Sushil Kumar Tewari Braham Singh