PINKOO @ PANKAJ KUMAR v. THE STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
CRLP/1766/2025 · 2025-01-31
Karunesh Singh Pawar, Rajiv Gupta
Criminal Appealbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 11968 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 11968 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:14474-DB Court No. - 46 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1766 of 2025 Petitioner :- Pinkoo @ Pankaj Kumar Respondent :- The State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Hemant Kumar Rai,Rajesh Rai Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The instant writ petition seeks quashing of the FIR dated 31.12.2024 giving rise to Case Crime No. 0586 of 2024, under Sections 8, 22, 29 and 60 of NDPS Act, 1985, Police Station- Jalesar, District- Etah.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from the allegation made in the first information report, prima facie no offence, complained of, is disclosed against the petitioner and, as such, the instant first information report is liable to be quashed.
4. Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that from the allegation made in the first information report, prima facie offence, complained of is clearly disclosed against the petitioner and, as such, the first information report cannot be quashed in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani reported in (2017) 2 SCC 779 and Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and Others reported in (2021) SCC Online SC 315 and in a recent decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No. 843 of 2024, Directorate Enforcement Vs. Niraj Tyagi and others.
5. Having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations made in the first information report and the relevant law cited by the learned AGA and the fact that impugned first information report discloses cognizable offence, we are of the opinion that the impugned first information report cannot be quashed.
6. The prayer for quashing of the first information report is therefore, refused.
7. The present writ petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 31.1.2025 KU Digitally signed by :- KALIM UDDIN SIDDIQUI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad