Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
Heard Sri R.K. Dwivedi,learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri D.S. Rana, learned AGA for the State and perused the First Information Report and the material on record.
The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Anik @ Sani, seeking quashing of the First Information Report dated 16.11.2020, registered as Case Crime No.600 of 2020, under Sections 304, 308, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Jaisinghpur, District Sultanpur with a further prayer to stay of arrest during the pendency of the investigation of the said case.
Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner along with his one sister, uncle and aunt has been falsely implicated in the present case just for the purpose of harassment. The petitioner is a minor boy aged about 14 years which is apparent from Class-IXth marksheet of the petitioner, copy of which is annexed as Annexure-5 to the writ petition. He further submits that initially the F.I.R. was registered for the offence under Section 308 I.P.C. etc. but subsequently when the deceased died, who was 75 years of age, Section 304 I.P.C. has been added in the present case. As per the post mortem report, the cause of death of the deceased is ante-mortem head injury. He next argued that no such incident as alleged by opp. party no.4 in the impugned F.I.R has ever taken place. No offence is made out against the petitioner, hence, F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the First Information Report and argued that the deceased died on account of head injury and further 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.
(Rajeev Singh,J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 19.2.2021 NS