Pawan Kumar vs State Of Up And 2 Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 9721 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Pawan Kumar vs State Of Up And 2 Others on 29 March, 2024

Author: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi

Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:54208-DB
 
Court No. - 42
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 4119 of 2024
 

 
Petitioner :- Pawan Kumar
 
Respondent :- State Of Up And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajeev Kumar Pal
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
 

Hon'ble Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Manju Thakur, learned A.G.A.-I for the State respondents.

2. The present writ petition is preferred for quashing of the first information report dated 16.01.2024, arising out of Case Crime No. 001/2024, under Section 354, 506 I.P.C. & Section 7/8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Nidhauli Kalan, District Etah.

3. Ms. Manju Thakur, learned A.G.A.-I on the instructions submits that during the investigation, Section 376(d) of I.P.C. and 5G/6 of the POCSO Act, has been added. She submits that from perusal of First Information Report, no case is made out for quashing of the first information report in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and others 1992 Supp.(1) SCC 335; Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, (2021) SCC Online SC 315, as also in latest judgment in Criminal Appeal No.843 of 2024 arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.10913 of 2023 (Directorate of Enforcement vs. Niraj Tyagi and others) connected with Criminal Appeal No.844 of 2024 as prima facie cognizable offence is made out and as such, no interference is required in the matter.

4. From a perusal of the First Information Report, we find that prima facie allegation with regard to commissioning of cognizable offence is disclosed, and therefore the First Information Report cannot be quashed. Prayer made in that regard is, therefore, declined.

5. Confronted with the situation, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the present writ petition may be dismissed as not pressed and leave may be accorded to press bail before the appropriate court.

6. Prayer made is allowed.

7. The writ petition is dismissed as not pressed with the said liberty.

Order Date :- 29.3.2024

Abhishek Gupta