Court No. - 43
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 25637 of 2019 Petitioner :- Anand Bharti Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Aslam Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Mohd. Aslam, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Deepak Mishra, 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 20.11.2019 registered as Case Crime No.418 of 2019, under sections 420, 406 I.P.C., P.S.- Kotwali Nagar, District Saharanpur.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no allegation against the petitioner and the role of disbursing a sum of Rs. 2 lacs each to the persons who were entitled to the benefit of the Government Scheme are assigned to other co- accused Anuj Singh, Anand Bharti, Vikas Bharadwaj, Sonu Pradhan and Danish.
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 :- 17.12.2019 Radhika