WPCRL/724/2019 of DINESH KUMAR Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
Parties
- received (PETITIONER)
- STATE OF UTTARAKHAND (RESPONDENT)
Cites (2)
- AIR 2021 SC 1918 (2021) DISTINGUISHED
- NEEHARIKA INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS (2021)
Statutes cited (1)
- constitution of india, article-226 (1950)
Full text
solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus
received
which he received as compensation. 5. Learned State Counsel, however, submits that issues raised by petitioner in this writ petition are not sufficient for quashing the F.I.R. He submits that contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner at best can be treated as his defence, which can be considered only during trial. He points out that charge sheet has been filed against petitioner and he is now facing trial. 6. Whether the allegation made in the F.I.R. against petitioner are correct or not, cannot be adjudicated at this stage. It is matter of trial. 7. Since F.I.R. discloses commission of cognizable offence and none of the parameters laid down 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, are satisfied for exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter. 8. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed. ( Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J.) 20.07.2023 Arpan