Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
The Court has convened through Video Conferencing.
Heard Sri Bharat Kumar Dixit, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Sri S.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the First Information Report as well as material on record.
The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Anand Singh @ Prahlad, seeking quashing of the First Information Report dated 02.04.2021, registered as Case Crime No.0090 of 2021, under Section 304 I.P.C. and 3(2) (va) SC/ST Act, Police station Bhadhokhar, District Raebareli with a further prayer to stay of his arrest during the pendency of the investigation of the said case.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the deceased, who was father of opp. party no.3, had taken Rs.2 lacs from the co-accused, namely, Om Prakash Yadav and petitioner was the witness of the said transaction and because of the said fact the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He next argued that though as per the F.I.R. the deceased was mercilessly beaten by the accused persons but as per the post mortem report of the deceased, there appears to be no ante-mortem injuries found on the person of the deceased which belies the prosecution case. The cause of death of the deceased could not be ascertained, hence, viscera was preserved. From the perusal of the inquest report as well as post mortem report, it appears that no such incident of marpeet had ever taken place with the deceased, as alleged in the impugned F.I.R. and false allegations have been levelled against the petitioner along with co-accused, namely, Om Prakash Yadav though no offence is made out against the petitioner, hence, the F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the First Information Report and argued that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. along with co-accused Om Prakash Yadav, the matter is under investigation and further argued that from the perusal of the First Information Report, a cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner, and therefore, the present writ petition be dismissed.
The Full Bench of this Court in Ajit Singh @ Muraha Vs. State of U.P. and others : (2006) 56 ACC 433 reiterated the view taken by the earlier Full Bench in Satya Pal Vs. State of U.P. and others : 2000 Cr.L.J. 569 after considering the various decisions including State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal and others : 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.
Further the Apex Court in the case of State of Telangana v. Habib Abdullah Jellani : (2017) 2 SCC 779 has disapproved an order restraining the Investigating Agencies arresting the accused where prayer of quashing the First Information Report has been refused.
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.
Accordingly, this writ petition fails and is dismissed.
The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by it alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked, before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 30.4.2021 NS