Indraveer Singh vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2018 Latest Caselaw 3808 ALL

Citation : 2018 Latest Caselaw 3808 ALL
Judgement Date : 19 November, 2018

Allahabad High Court

Indraveer Singh vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 19 November, 2018

Bench: Ram Surat (Maurya), Bachchoo Lal




HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 47
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 31618 of 2018
 

 
Petitioner :- Indraveer Singh
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- S.M. Iqbal Hasan
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Ram Surat Ram (Maurya),J.

Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

Heard Sri S.M. Iqbal Hasan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Anil Kumar Kushwaha, learned A.G.A. for the State.

The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the FIR dated 1.9.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 658 of 2018 under section 420 IPC and Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act, P.S. Chandpur, District Bijnor.

In the FIR in substance the allegation has been made that on a single Adhar number the Ration has been withdrawn number of items. In some cases it was withdrawn 92 times. Thus, the Essential Commodities has been sold in black market.

The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the fair price licensee are supplied E Pos Machine and for operating the E Pos Machine ID Number of Licensee of shop holder is required. After linking opening the machine the licensee has to link the Aadhar number to the card holder and thereafter on putting biometric identity the Machine is operated. Thus, according to the petitioner itself E Pos Machine of petitioner could not be operated without ID number of the shop holder and without putting biometric identity on the same E Pos Machine. So far as hiking of the Aadhar number is concerned without operating the E Pos Machine the hiking of Aadhar number will of no consequence as such involvement of the petitioner in hiking Aadhar number and generating biometric identity cannot be ruled out. At present the FIR discloses offence and prima facie involvement of the petitioner is proved, therefore, the FIR is not liable to be quashed nor any protection can be granted to the petitioner.

The petition has no merit and is accordingly dismissed.

Order Date :- 19.11.2018

Masarrat