Hon'ble Subhash Chand,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned AGA for the State.
The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners, praying for quashing of the First Information Report, registered as Case Crime No. 243 of 2020 under Sections 332, 353, 504, 426 I.P.C, P.S. Trilokpur, District Siddarthnagar with a further prayer to stay their arrest during pendency of investigation of the said case.
It is urged that the instant F.I.R is by way of counter blast after petitioner filed application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C for a direction to register a F.I.R against respondent no. 4.
We have gone through the allegations in the First Information Report. Prima-facie, the allegations made therein discloses offence under the relevant provisions of I.P.C and therefore, we do not find it a fit case where the F.I.R can be quashed.
In respect of the second prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners for stay of arrest of the petitioners till submission of the report under Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, we would like to take notice of the law laid down by Supreme Court in State of Telengana v. Habib Abdullah Jellani; 2017 (2) SCC 779 wherein the Supreme Court has disapproved an order restraining the Investigating Agencies from arresting the accused where prayer for quashing the FIR has been declined. Relying on the said decision, the Supreme Court entertained Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 4650 of 2020 (Samiksha Singh @ Nikki v. The State of U.P. & Others) wherein similar direction issued by the High Court staying arrest until the submission of report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. was under challenge. The order is as follows: -
"1. Mr Sanchit Garga, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that while the High Court declined to quash the FIR, at the same time, it has granted an order protecting the accused from arrest until the submission of the report under Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 which, it has been submitted, is impermissible in law. He relies on a decision of this Court in State of Telengana v. Habib Abdullah Jeelani.
2. Issue notice, returnable in three weeks.
3. Liberty to serve the Standing Counsel for the State of Uttar Pradesh, in addition."
Having regard to the law laid down by Supreme Court in State of Telengana (supra), we also decline to grant the second prayer.
Before parting, we would like to quote the observations made by the Supreme Court in Jogender Kumar Vs. State of U.P., AIR 1994 SC 1349 in relation to personal liberty of a citizen and the manner in which police officer should exercise his power to arrest accused person, so that the same is duly complied with:-
"No arrest can be made in a routine manner on a mere allegation of commission of an offence made against a person. It would be prudent for a police officer in the interest of protection of the constitutional rights of a citizen and perhaps in his own interest that no arrest should be made without a reasonable satisfaction reached after some investigation as to the genuineness and bona fides of a complaint and a reasonable belief both as to the person's complicity and even so as to the need to effect arrest. Denying a person of his liberty is a serious matter. The recommendations of the Police Commission merely reflect the constitutional concomitants of the fundamental right to personal liberty and freedom. Aperson is not liable to arrest merely on the suspicion of complicity in an offence. There must be some reasonable justification in the opinion of the officer effecting the arrest that such arrest is necessary and justified. Except in heinous offences, an arrest must be avoided if a police officer issues notice to person to attend the Station House and not to leave the Station without permission would do."
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed with the above observations. This is without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to seek anticipatory bail/bail, as may be maintainable or advised. If any such recourse is taken, the bail application shall be disposed of expeditiously, without being influenced by any observation made in the instant order.
.
(Subhash Chand, J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.) Order Date :- 29.1.2021 PS