Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 193081 (ALL)

PRAVEEN KUMAR SINGH v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 3 OTHERS

CRLP/22679/2025 · 2025-10-13

Criminal Appealbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 22679 of 2025 Court No. - 45 HON'BLE RAJIV GUPTA, J. HON'BLE DEVENDRA SINGH-I, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer to quash the FIR dated 3.6.2024 giving rise to Case Crime No.0002 of 2024, under Sections 409, 420, 120-B IPC, Police Station-S.I.T., District State Special Investigation Team. 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 impugned first information report is liable to be quashed. 4. Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that the impugned first information report has been lodged after making requisite inquiry and approval. Moreover from the allegations made in the FIR, prima facie offence is clearly disclosed against the petitioner, therefore, the impugned first information report can not be quashed in view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Telangana vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani reported in (2017) 2 SCC 779, Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Arpit Malviya, Awadhesh Kumar Malviya Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Praveen Kumar Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of Uttar Pradesh And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 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. In view of the above, we are not inclined to quash the impugned first information report and the prayer for quashing of the first information report is refused. 6. However, in case, the petitioner applies for anticipatory bail/regular bail before the appropriate court, his bail application shall be considered and disposed of as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law. 7. With the aforesaid observation, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. October 14, 2025 S. Singh CRLP No. 22679 of 2025 2 (Devendra Singh-I,J.) (Rajiv Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- SAVITA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad