Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2023 (8) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2023 (8) TMI 1433 - HC - Indian Laws


Issues Involved:
1. Quashing of the First Information Report (FIR).
2. Interim protection from arrest and coercive steps.
3. Stay on investigation and consequential actions.
4. Costs of the writ petition.

Summary:

1. Quashing of the First Information Report (FIR):
The petitioners sought to quash the FIR dated 22.07.2023, registered as Case Crime No. 611 of 2023 under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC and Section 82 of the Registration Act, 1908, at Police Station Kavi Nagar, Ghaziabad. The FIR was filed by the informant alleging illegal sale and undervaluation of property, resulting in financial loss to the state. The petitioners argued that the FIR was part of a civil dispute related to loan transactions and property auctions, and multiple FIRs were being filed for the same loan transaction involving different properties.

2. Interim Protection from Arrest and Coercive Steps:
The petitioners requested interim protection from arrest and any coercive steps until the next date of listing. One judge granted interim protection based on the Supreme Court's interim protection in a similar case, while the other judge denied it, stating that arrest was not essential under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. and that the state should be given time to respond.

3. Stay on Investigation and Consequential Actions:
The petitioners sought a stay on all investigations and consequential actions arising from the FIR. The judge who granted interim protection extended it to the petitioners, citing the Supreme Court's order and a similar interim order by the High Court in another case. The other judge did not find a prima facie case for interim protection without responses from the informant and the state.

4. Costs of the Writ Petition:
The petitioners requested the court to award the costs of the writ petition.

Separate Judgments:
The two judges delivered separate judgments. One judge granted interim protection, citing the Supreme Court's interim protection in a similar case and a High Court order. The other judge denied interim protection, emphasizing the need for state response and the non-essential nature of arrest under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. The matter was referred to the Chief Justice for nomination of a bench to resolve the difference of opinion.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates