Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Ravindra Alias Guddu Yadav vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|27 April, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10793 of 2018 Petitioner :- Ravindra Alias Guddu Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar Misra,Anita Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Dinesh KUmar Misra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Prabhash Pandey, learned Brief Holder appearing for the State and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 21.2.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 0034 of 2018, under Sections 307 IPC and 60, 63 and 72 of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station-Gaura Badshahpur, District Jaunpur.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner was not present on the date and time of the occurrence. He is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. 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 petitioners, 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 petitioners.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 27.4.2018 AU
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

Ravindra Alias Guddu Yadav vs State Of U P And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
27 April, 2018
Judges
  • Ramesh Sinha
Advocates
  • Dinesh Kumar Misra Anita Singh