Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 7911 (UTT)

JASVEER SINGH TALIYAN v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/1325/2021 · 2025-02-17

Manoj Kumar Tiwari

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS WPCRL No. 1325 of 2021 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. M.K. Goyal, Advocate for the petitioners. 2. Mr. K.S. Bora, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. J.P. Kandpal, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. Petitioners have sought quashing of FIR No. 245 of 2018, for offences punishable under Sections 420, 120-B, 465, 466, 467, 468 & 471 IPC, registered at Police Station Dalanwala, District Dehradun. 4. Learned State Counsel submits that upon investigation, Investigating Officer has filed charge-sheet against petitioners. He thus, submits that the writ petition has become infructuous. 5. The writ petition would not become infructuous by filing of charge-sheet and FIR can be quashed, if ingredients of the offence are not made out. 6. The impugned F.I.R. is on record as Annexure No.6 to the writ petition. The allegations against the petitioners are serious and specific, and the ingredients of the offences are made out. Whether the allegations made in the F.I.R. are correct or not, cannot be examined at this stage. It is matter of trial. 7. In view of parameters laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra & others, reported in AIR 2021 SC 1918, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the impugned F.I.R. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition fails and is dismissed. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 17.02.2025 Navin