Nawab Abbasi vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 295 UK

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL


            Criminal Writ Petition No. 124 of 2023

Nawab Abbasi                                          ..........Petitioner

                                     Vs.

State of Uttarakhand and others                    ........ Respondents



Present :    Mr. Bilal Ahmed, Advocate for the petitioner through video
             conferencing.
             Mr. V.S. Rathore, A.G.A. for the State.
             Mr. Pradeep Kumar Chauhan, Advocate for the Caveator through
             video conferencing.




                               JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The challenge in this petition is made to the

FIR/Case Crime No.11 of 2023, dated 10.01.2023, under

Sections 420, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Kotwali

Jawalapur, District Haridwar with the directions that the

petitioner be not arrested pursuant to the FIR.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the record.

3. According to the FIR, the petitioner told it to

the informant that the property of the informant is to be

taken into possession by the Waqf Board, but in case, the

informant could pay `5,00,000/- to the petitioner, the

petitioner would see that the property of the informant is

not taken into possession by the Waqf Board. Based on

the assurance given by the petitioner, `3,00,000/- had

already been paid by the information to the petitioner.

`2,50,000/- was in cash and `50,000/- was deposited in

the account of the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would

submit that earlier the brother of the petitioner had filed a

writ petition in this Court. This Court had directed

Collector, Haridwar to take appropriate action in the

matter. The informant filed an application to recall the

order, but such an application filed by the informant was

rejected on 09.01.2023 by this Court.

5. It is argued that, in fact, the informant had

given a cheque of `2,50,000/- in favour of the brother of

the petitioner. Since, brother of the petitioner had filed a

complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, "the Act"), in order to

settle the dispute under Section 138 of the Act, the

informant gave a cheque of `50,000/- to the petitioner. It

is argued that the FIR has been filed to settle the score

and to wreak the vengeance.

6. It is a petition under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India. In case, prima facie case is made

out, generally no interference is warranted.

7. It is categorical case of the informant that he

was cheated. The FIR in the instant case, discloses

commission of cognizable offence. The credibility,

reliability and trustworthiness of the allegations, as

levelled in the FIR, would find scrutiny during

investigation. Therefore, this Court is of the view that

there is no reason to make any interference in this

petition. Accordingly, the petition deserves to be

dismissed.

8. The petition is dismissed in limine.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) Vacation Judge 16.01.2023 Sanjay