Rup Pal Fair Price Seller vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 26153 ALL

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 26153 ALL
Judgement Date : 25 September, 2023

Allahabad High Court

Rup Pal Fair Price Seller vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 25 September, 2023

Bench: Anjani Kumar Mishra, Vivek Kumar Singh





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:185014-DB
 
Court No. - 43
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 15038 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Rup Pal Fair Price Seller
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Uttar Kumar Goswami
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J.

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The instant writ petition seeks quashing of the FIR dated 18.08.2023 giving rise to Case Crime No.245 of 2023, under Sections 3/7 Essential Commodities Act, Police Station- Gajraula, District- Pilibhit.

3. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Government Order provides for proceedings of cancellation etc., and that no offence under Section 3/7 under the Essential Commodities Act is made out from the allegations. In this regard, reliance has been placed upon the judgment passed by Supreme Court in Prakash Babu vs. State of Madhya Pradesh 2004 LawSuit (SC) 1023.

4. On a pointed query by the Court as to how the discrepancy in the stock arose, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is prepared to make the discrepancy good.

5. Learned AGA has opposed the writ petition.

6. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and upon a perusal of the record, we find that the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner are his defence, which cannot be looked into while dealing with a writ petition seeking quashing of a first information report.

7. Moreover, the allegations made in the First Information Report clearly disclose commission of cognizable offences and the allegations are serious in nature. Therefore, prayer of the petitioner to quash the First Information Report is completely misconceived and is rejected.

8. Reliance upon the decision in Prakash Babu is not applicable at this stage. In the case cited, no order or notification etc., under Section 3 of the Excise Act had been produced or relied upon during the trial, which was therefore, held vitiated and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration.

9. The writ petition is therefore dismissed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to apply for bail/anticipatory bail.

Order Date :- 25.9.2023

Aditya Tripathi