Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA
Vishwa Bandhu – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Jitendra Kumar Sinha, J.
1. Heard Mr. Alok Saxena, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Sunil Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and Sri B.P. Singh, learned AGA for the State respondents and perused the affidavit filed in support of this application.
2. Present application under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for the sake of brevity ‘BNSS’) has been filed for quashing the first information report dated 14.6.2024 registered as P.S. Civil Lines, Meerut, giving rise to the registration of Crime No 192 of 2024 against the applicant and two others for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the instant first information report which has been lodged is an abuse of process of the Court as on similar facts, earlier first information report bearing no. 0039 of 2022 was lodged on 3.2.2022 against 04 persons, namely, Narendra Singh Tomar, Satish Tewatiya, Hareram Dua and Jatin Dua for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 471, 386 and 120B, P.S. Transport Nagar, District Meerut (annexure 4 to the memo of application). It
A second FIR cannot be filed for the same offences due to the principles set forth in Section 162, CrPC, and the distinction between civil and criminal disputes is paramount in determining maintainab....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's power to quash proceedings under Section 482 of the CrPC to prevent abuse of the process of law and to secure the ends of justice.
Cheating and forgery – A bonafide criminal prosecution cannot be quashed at threshold.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. should be sparing and cautious, and the court should only intervene if ....
The court ruled that distinct allegations in a second FIR, even involving some overlap with a prior complaint, do not invalidate the subsequent investigation process, affirming the principle of judic....
The court emphasized that the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be sparingly exercised and that the court should not interfere with the investigation unless no cognizable offence is disclosed. I....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
