RAVINDRA MAITHANI
Sannoo – Appellant
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Ravindra Maithani, J. - Heard learned counsel for the parties through video conferencing.
2. Petitioners seek quashing of an FIR No. 641 of 2020, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 406 IPC, Police Station Laksar, District Haridwar.
3. According to the FIR, the informant deals with chickens, he purchases chickens from the farm of petitioner no.3 Omveer. On 16.09.2020, mid-night at 01:00 AM, they went to purchase chickens at the farm of petitioner no. 3 Omveer. Money was taken from the informant but chickens were not given. All the three petitioners were present at the time of incident and when the informant insisted for chickens, he were abused and petitioner no. 3 Omveer was about to assault the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the FIR is false. On the date of incident at mid-night, Police had booked the parties under Section 151 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "the Code"), but, subsequently this false report is lodged. Alternatively, it is argued that it is the case which is covered by the judgment in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and another, (2014) 8 SCC 273
5. This is the petition under Article 226 of the Co
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.