Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 55623 (ALL)

ANAND SONKAR v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

CRLP/9776/2025 · 2025-05-14

Vivek Kumar Birla, Yogesh Dubey Joint Registrar Judicial

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:79813-DB Court No. - 43 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9776 of 2025 Petitioner :- Anand Sonkar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kristen Sleeth,Meera Devi,Yashpal Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J. 1. Although names of three counsel are appearing in the cause list, however, Sri Anil Kumar holding brief of Sri Yashpal Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner is praying for adjournment on the ground that he may be granted time to file injury report. 2. Learned A.G.A. on instructions submits that he has injury report. 3. Under these circumstances, we do not find any good ground to adjourn the matter. 4. The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 10.8.2024 registered as Case Crime No. 408 of 2024 under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 109, 352, 351(3) of B.N.S, Police Station Rudrapur, District Deoria. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioner in the aforesaid case. 5. Learned A.G.A. on instructions submitted that in the present case charge-sheet no. A-43 of 2025 dated 8.2.2025 against Khushihal and Poonam has been submitted and the petitioner is absconding. He further pointed out that eight persons were injured in the incident. 6. Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR, which discloses cognizable offence. 7. On perusal of record we find that specific allegations have been levelled against the petitioners and there can be no part quashing of the first information report. 8. Perusal of the impugned first information report prima facie reveals commission of cognizable offence. Therefore, in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and others, 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335 and M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918 and in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.3262/2021 (Leelavati Devi @ Leelawati & another vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh) decided on 07.10.2021, no case has been made out for interference with the impugned first information report. 9. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. Order Date :- 15.5.2025 Lalit Shukla Digitally signed by :- LALIT KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad