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. 2216 of 2022

Shri Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.

Shri Abhishek Bahuguna, learned counsel for

the petitioner.

Ms. Manisha Rana, learned AGA for the

State.

By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has

prayed for the quashing the impugned FIR lodged

by the respondent no. 3 on 19.04.2022 against him

bearing No. 0254 of 2022 for the alleged offences

punishable under Section 420, 506 IPC, Police

Station – Patel Nagar, District Dehradun (contained

as Annexure No. 1 to this writ petition).

A careful reading of the impugned FIR

reveals that petitioner gave an impression to the

complainant / respondent no. 3 that on payment of

Rs. 20,00,000/-, he can secure a job for the him in

the Agriculture Department, State of Uttarakhand.

Thereafter, money was given to the petitioner but

he neither secured a job for the complainant nor

returned the money.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would

submit that there is no material available on record

to show that complainant has given money to him

and entire allegations are false.

While disposing of the writ petition for

quashing of the FIR under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India, this Court is not required to

indulge in a mini trial at the stage of FIR. It is a

settled principle of law that whenever a case of

cognizable offence is registered, all the allegations

levelled against the accused are to be investigated

by the Investigating Officer.

This being the settled principle of law no

interference is required in the matter.

On the last date, this Court directed the

learned counsel for the petitioner to examine his

case in the light of judgments rendered by Hon’ble

Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana Vs.

Bhajan Lal (1992) Supp. (1) SCC 335 and M/s

Niharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of

Maharastra and others (2021) SCC Online SC 315,

however, he fairly concedes before this Court that

he has not gone through these cases.

In view of the above, we are of a prima facie

view that even a case for issuance of notice is not

made out. FIR reveals that a cognizable offence is

made out against the petitioner. This case does not

come within the parameters settled down by the

Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhajan Lal

and Niharika (supra).

In that view of the matter, writ petition is

dismissed in limine being devoid of merits.

(Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.)

05.12.2022

(Grant urgent certified copy of this order, as per Rules)

SKS