WPCRL/2216/2022
2022 Latest Caselaw 3896 UK

              Office Notes,
             reports, orders
             or proceedings
SL.
      Date    or directions                       COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
             and Registrar's
                order with
               Signatures
                               WPCRL No. 2216 of 2022
                               Shri Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.

Shri Abhishek Bahuguna, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Ms. Manisha Rana, learned AGA for the State.

By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the quashing the impugned FIR lodged by the respondent no. 3 on 19.04.2022 against him bearing No. 0254 of 2022 for the alleged offences punishable under Section 420, 506 IPC, Police Station - Patel Nagar, District Dehradun (contained as Annexure No. 1 to this writ petition).

A careful reading of the impugned FIR reveals that petitioner gave an impression to the complainant / respondent no. 3 that on payment of Rs. 20,00,000/-, he can secure a job for the him in the Agriculture Department, State of Uttarakhand. Thereafter, money was given to the petitioner but he neither secured a job for the complainant nor returned the money.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there is no material available on record to show that complainant has given money to him and entire allegations are false.

While disposing of the writ petition for quashing of the FIR under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, this Court is not required to indulge in a mini trial at the stage of FIR. It is a settled principle of law that whenever a case of cognizable offence is registered, all the allegations levelled against the accused are to be investigated by the Investigating Officer.

This being the settled principle of law no interference is required in the matter.

On the last date, this Court directed the learned counsel for the petitioner to examine his case in the light of judgments rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal (1992) Supp. (1) SCC 335 and M/s Niharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharastra and others (2021) SCC Online SC 315, however, he fairly concedes before this Court that he has not gone through these cases.

In view of the above, we are of a prima facie view that even a case for issuance of notice is not made out. FIR reveals that a cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner. This case does not come within the parameters settled down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhajan Lal and Niharika (supra).

In that view of the matter, writ petition is dismissed in limine being devoid of merits.

(Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.) 05.12.2022 (Grant urgent certified copy of this order, as per Rules) SKS