Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11259
of 2019
Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Gupta Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Satish Chandra Mishra,Sabhajeet Yadav,Siddharth Shankar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J. Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.
Heard Sri Sabhajeet Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned AGA and perused the impugned F.I.R, as well as material brought on record.
The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R, dated 12.4.2019 registered as Case Crime No. 0075 of 2019, under sections 498A, 304B of I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, IPC P.S. Rajghat, District Gorakpur.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that matter relates to dowry death, petitioner is brother-in- law(nandoi) and the contention raised that the death was on account of burn injuries for reasons not attributable to petitioner which is rightly countered by learned A.G.A. that petitioner being a close relative, presumption operates against him, the alleged plea cannot be examined at this stage.
Learned A.G.A, opposed the prayer for quashing of the F.I.R, 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.
Order Date :- 29.4.2019 Rk