Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 174290 (ALL)

RINKU v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO. AND OTHERS

CRLP/10070/2025 · 2025-11-03

Rajnish Kumar, Zafeer Ahmad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10070 of 2025 Court No. - 10 HON'BLE RAJNISH KUMAR, J. HON'BLE ZAFEER AHMAD, J. 1. Heard Sri Pravin Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA. 2.This petition has been filed challenging the F.I.R. dated 07.10.2025 vide Case Crime No.0936/2025, under Section 111(1) BNS & 3/5/25 Arms Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Barabanki. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged on the basis of wrong and concocted story and the petitioner has been named in the F.I.R. only on the basis of statement of the co- accused Ajay Yadav, whereas no offence has been committed by the petitioner. 4. Learned AGA opposed the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged in accordance with law and mainly because the name of the petitioner has come only on the basis of the statement of the co-accused, it cannot be a ground for quashing of the F.I.R., as the petitioner is habitual of committing of such offence and he has a criminal history of 4 cases also. 5.Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of record as well as the contents of the F.I.R., the commissioning of offence cannot be ruled out as the allegation is of Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Bhola Singh Patel, Pravin Kumar Verma Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Rinku .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) Section 111(1) of B.N.S. and mainly because the name of the petitioner has come in light only on the basis of statement of the co-accused, it cannot be a ground for quashing of the F.I.R. in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. versus State of Maharashtra and Others; (2021) SCC Online SC 315. 6. In view of above, the petition is dismissed. November 3, 2025 Akanksha Sri/- CRLP No. 10070 of 2025 2 (Zafeer Ahmad,J.) (Rajnish Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- AKANKSHA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- AKANKSHA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench