Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 20404 of 2018 Petitioner :- Amol Kumar @ Sonu Dubey Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Devendra Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Devendra Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Prabhash Pandey, learned Brief Holder appearing for the State 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 09.11.2017 registered as Case Crime No.0658 of 2017, under Sections 255, 272, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and section 60, 62, 63 Excise Act, Police Station-Bakewar, District Etawah.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the name of the petitioner has come into light in the confessional statement of the co- accused. He further submits that the co-accused Amit Gupta is stated to have been released on bail from a competent court. He is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. 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 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 court below shall take into consideration the aforesaid fact when the bail application of the petitioner is considered, after verification of the same.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 30.7.2018 AU