Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Ajay Saxena vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|11 June, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 2
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 16203 of 2019 Petitioner :- Ajay Saxena Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Bahadur Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J. Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard Sri Ram Bahadur Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Arundera Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
This petition has been moved with a prayer to quash the impugned FIR dated 23.4.2019, arising out of case crime no.311 of 2019, under Sections 406, 120-B and 504 IPC, P.S. Highway, District Mathura and also made further prayer to stay the proceedings in the aforesaid case.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case because he was only mediator in the deal. It is further argued that co-accused Rajnesh has already been granted bail by trial court. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are absolutely false, frivolous and baseless. From a perusal of the FIR, no offence is made out against the petitioner, hence, the same be quashed.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for quashing of the F.I.R. which discloses cognizable offence.
The Full Bench of this Court in Ajit Singh @ Muraha v. State of U.P. (2006 (56) ACC 433) reiterated the view taken by the earlier Full Bench in Satya Pal v. State of U.P. (2000 Cr.L.J. 569) after considering the various decisions including State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (AIR 1992 SC 604) that there can be no interference with the investigation or order staying arrest unless cognizable offence is not ex-facie discernible from the allegations contained in the F.I.R. or there is any statutory restriction operating on the power of the Police to investigate a case.
From the perusal of the FIR, prima facie it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out. Hence no ground exists for quashing of the F.I.R. or staying the arrest of the petitioner.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J) (Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) Order Date :- 11.6.2019 Neeraj
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

Ajay Saxena vs State Of U P And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
11 June, 2019
Judges
  • Dinesh Kumar Singh I
Advocates
  • Ram Bahadur Singh