Even 1.5 Years in Jail Doesn’t Dilute Section 37 NDPS Rigour: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail in 710 Kg Poppy Husk Case Stay of Conviction Nullifies Disqualification Under Section 8(3) RP Act: Allahabad High Court Dismisses Quo Warranto Against Rahul Gandhi Custodial Interrogation Necessary to Uncover ₹2 Crore MGNREGA Scam: Kerala High Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail for Vendors in Corruption Case Order 41 Rule 23 CPC | Trial Court Cannot Decide Title Solely on a Vacated Judgment: Himachal Pradesh High Court Strikes By Bar Associations Cannot Stall Justice: Allahabad High Court Holds Office Bearers Liable for Contempt if Revenue Suits Are Delayed Due to Boycotts To Constitute a Service PE, Services Must Be Furnished Within India Through Employees Present in India: Delhi High Court Medical Negligence | State Liable for Loss of Vision in Botched Cataract Surgeries: Gauhati High Court Awards Compensation Waiver of Right Under Section 50 NDPS is Valid Even Without Panch Signatures: Bombay High Court Agricultural Land Is 'Property' Under Hindu Women’s Right to Property Act, 1937: A.P. High Court Tenant Who Pays Rent After Verifying Landlord’s Will Cannot Dispute His Title Under Section 116 Evidence Act: Himachal Pradesh High Court Dismisses Eviction Challenge by HP State Cooperative Bank Clever Drafting Cannot Override Limitation Bar: Gujarat High Court Rejects Suit for Specific Performance Once Divorce by Mutual Consent Is Final, Wife Cannot Pursue Criminal Case for Stridhan Without Reserving Right to Do So: Himachal Pradesh High Court Caste-Based Insults Must Show Intent – Mere Abuse Not Enough for Atrocities Act: Gujarat High Court Upholds Acquittal Failure to Inform Detenu of Right to Represent to Detaining Authority Vitiates NSA Detention: Gauhati High Court Awarding Further Interest On Penal Charges Is Contrary To Fundamental Policy Of Indian Arbitration Law: Bombay High Court

Accused Raised Anti-Nation Slogans in Temple – Allahabad High Court Denies Quashing of Proceedings

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a noteworthy judgment on 15th March 2024, the Allahabad High Court, led by Hon'ble Justice Subhash Vidyarthi, refused to quash criminal proceedings against Faizan Ahmad and others. This decision was made in light of charges that involved raising anti-nation slogans in a temple, a serious allegation under Sections 153 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Legal Point of the Judgment: The pivotal legal question concerned the use of Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) for quashing criminal proceedings. The key issue was whether the facts presented formed a sufficient basis to dismiss the charges at this preliminary stage.

Facts and Issues: The origin of the case lay in an FIR filed at Police Station Hasanganj, Lucknow. It was alleged that the applicants disrupted a religious assembly in a temple by chanting slogans against their own nation and in favor of a foreign entity, besides threatening those present. This incident led to their immediate arrest, and the allegations were supported by eyewitness accounts.

Scope of Section 482 Cr.P.C.: The Court emphasized its limited function under Section 482 Cr.P.C., highlighting its inability to conduct a thorough evaluation of evidence at this juncture. The determination required was whether there exists a prima facie case justifying a trial.

Evaluation of Allegations and Investigation: The Court, after reviewing the FIR and the investigation findings, noted that the allegations, supported by eyewitness testimony, formed a credible basis for a trial.

Judicial Precedents: In its analysis, the Court referenced key Supreme Court rulings, including 'State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal', which establish guidelines for exercising the inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., underscoring the need for judicial restraint in such matters.

Decision: Hon'ble Justice Subhash Vidyarthi ruled that the seriousness of the allegations, backed by preliminary evidence, merited a full trial. Consequently, the application to quash the criminal proceedings was dismissed as lacking in merit.

Date of Decision: 15th March 2024

Faizan Ahmad @ Idrisi Faizan Shamshad Ahmad And Others vs. State Of U.P.

Latest Legal News