Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 25720 of 2018
Petitioner :- Anil Singh Sengar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- B.N.Singh,Santosh Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri B.N.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri N.K.Verma, 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 8.8.2018, registered as case crime No.82 of 2018, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 354(b) I.P.C. and 3(1) (w)-(i) (ii) and 3(2) (va) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Rendhar, District Jalaun.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with malafide intention. He further submits that the the family members of the petitioner were challaned under Section 107/116 Cr.P.C. and the petitioner was not involved in the said case and subsequently the impugned FIR has been lodged by respondent no.3 on the basis of an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. against the family members of the petitioner including the petitioner also. He next argued that as per the FIR, the only allegation against the petitioner is that he has threatened the victim by uttering the caste indicated words, the said allegation levelled against the petitioner is absolutely false, frivolous and baseless. No offence is made out against the petitioner, hence, FIR is liable to be quashed by this Court.
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 petitioners. The prayer for the same is hereby refused.
However, if the petitioner moves bail application before the court below, the court below while considering his bail application shall take into account the aforesaid fact as has been argued by learned counsel for the petitioner.
The application stands disposed of.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
Order Date :- 17.9.2018 NS