Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 85027 (ALL)

SACHIN CHAUDHARY @ PRADEEP SACHIN v. STATE OF UP AND 3 OTHERS

CRLP/17526/2025 · 2025-08-10

Abdul Shahid, Rajiv Gupta

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:135333-DB Court No. - 46 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 17526 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sachin Chaudhary @ Pradeep Sachin Respondent :- State Of Up And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Devendra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J. Hon'ble Abdul Shahid,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer to quash the impugned first information report dated 22.4.2025 registered as Case Crime No. 266 of 2025, under Sections 103(1), 123, 3(5), 109, 61(2)(a) of B.N.S., Police Station Iglas, District Aligarh. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from the allegations 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 for the State has submitted that from the allegations made in the first information report, 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 cases of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani reported in (2017) 2 SCC 779, Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. 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. Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations made in the first information report and the relevant law cited by learned AGA for the State and the fact that impugned first information report discloses cognizable offence against the petitioner, we are of the opinion that the impugned first information report can not be quashed, therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned first information report is refused. 6. The instant writ petition is wholly misconceived and is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 11.8.2025 M. Tarik Digitally signed by :- MOHD TARIK High Court of Judicature at Allahabad