RIZWAN ALI ALIAS RISWAN ALI v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
WPCRL/1585/2021 · 2025-01-03
Manoj Kumar Tiwari
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 8788 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 8788 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
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 1585/2021 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
None appears for the petitioner.
Mr. Devendra Singh, AGA, with Mr. J.P. Kandpal, Brief Holder for the State. (2) Petitioner has sought quashing of FIR No. 201 of 2021, lodged against him for the offences punishable under Section 363, 366 IPC at PS Mukhani, District Nainital. (3) Learned State Counsel submits that upon investigation, chargesheet has been filed against petitioner. He thus submits that writ petition has become infructuous and petitioner can challenge the chargesheet in proceedings under Section 528 of BNSS, if so advised. (4) Writ petition does not become infructuous merely because chargesheet is filed. Impugned FIR is on record as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. Perusal of the same indicates that specific allegations have been made against petitioner and ingredients of alleged offences are also made out. Thus the contention as raised in the writ petition that petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated cannot be accepted as the said aspect can be gone into during trial. (5) Therefore, in view of the law
declared by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra & others, reported in AIR 2021 SC 1918, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the impugned FIR. Accordingly, writ petition fails and is dismissed.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)
3.1.2025 Pr