Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Mohd. Arham, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri N.K.Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned FIR as well as material brought on record.
The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 4.5.2018, registered as case crime No.602 of 2018, under Sections 60, 63, 72 U.P. Excise Act, P.S. NOIDA Sector 20, District Gautam Budh Nagar.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with malafide intention. He further submitted that the the name of the petitioner has come into light in confessional statement of the driver of the vehicle in question and the petitioner is said to have fled away from the place of occurrence. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are absolutely false, frivolous and baseless. From a perusal of the FIR, no offence is made out against the petitioner, hence, the same be quashed.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR which discloses cognizable offence.
The Full Bench of this Court in Ajit Singh @ Muraha v. State of U.P. (2006 (56) ACC 433) reiterated the view taken by the earlier Full Bench in Satya Pal v. State of U.P. (2000 Cr.L.J. 569) after considering the various decisions including State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (AIR 1992 SC 604) that there can be no interference with the investigation or order staying arrest unless cognizable offence is not ex-facie discernible from the allegations contained in the F.I.R. or there is any statutory restriction operating on the power of the Police to investigate a case.
From the perusal of the FIR, prima facie it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out. Hence no ground exists for quashing of the F.I.R. or staying the arrest of the petitioner.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 29.5.2018/NS