Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 122117 (ALL)

SAYYAD ARSAD ABBAS AS FIR ARSAD ABBAS ALIAS MANNI AND OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. COMM. OF POLICE LKO. AND OTHERS

CRLP/1074/2025 · 2025-02-07

Ajai Kumar Srivastava I, Sangeeta Chandra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:8060-DB Court No. - 9 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1074 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sayyad Arsad Abbas As Fir Arsad Abbas Alias Manni And Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Comm. Of Police Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohammad Irfan Siddiqui,Mohammed Alam Khan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.G.A., who appears for the State-respondents. 2. This petition has been filed with the following main prayer:- "i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned first information report dated 10.01.2025 lodged by opposite party no. 3, in Case Crime No. (F.I.R. NO.) 0006 OF 2025, Under Section- 191(2), 115(2), 351(2), 352, 76 of B.N.S., Police Station- Shahadatganj, District- Lucknow, the first information report is being annexed as Annexure No. 1 to this writ petition." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the impugned first information report. 4. The learned A.G.A. has produced before this Court instructions sent by Sub-Inspector Anand Vikas, Police Station Saadatganj, District Lucknow, wherein, it has been stated that investigation has been concluded and charge sheet has been prepared against the accused, namely, Syed Raja Shah Abdi @ Pampi, Syed Arsad Abbas @ Manni, Syed Ali Abbas Abdi @ Hingu, Syed Haider Abbas Abdi @ Ayya, Famo Bano and Syed Sumaiyya Abbas Abdi and the same has been submitted on 17.01.2025 to the Supervisory Authority. 5. The said instructions are kept on record. 6. Since the chargesheet has been prepared and submitted to the supervisory authority, it is presumed that sufÏcient evidence has been collected and filed with the chargesheet before the trial court concerned for its evaluation, therefore, this Court feels it to be inappropriate to interfere at this stage. 7. The writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to approach the competent court for raising their challenge to the chargesheet. (Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I, J.) (Sangeeta Chandra, J.) Order Date :- 7.2.2025 cks/- Digitally signed by :- CHANDRA KANT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench