Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 31340 of 2018 Petitioner :- Arun Kumar And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Harshit Pathak,Anurag Pathak Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ajay Kumar Jagdish
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Krishna Pratap Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Ajay Kumar Jagdish, learned counsel for respondent No. 3 and learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the F.I.R. dated 25.06.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 25 of 2018, under sections 498-A, 323, 504 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and section 66 (E) and 67 (A) of Information Technology Act, 2000, PS Mahila Thana, District Saharanpur.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged by the respondent no. 3 roping in the entire family of his son-in-law petitioner no. 1, containing absolutely false and concocted allegations regarding commission of offences by them u/s 498-A, 323, 504 I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act 1961 and section 66 (E) and 67 (A) of Information Technology Act, 2000. He next submitted that apart from bald allegations made in the F.I.R., no evidence whatsoever is forthcoming even prima facie indicating at the complicity of the petitioners in the commission of alleged crime, and hence the impugned F.I.R., which is a product of malice and bundle of lies, is liable to be quashed.
Per contra learned A.G.A. submitted that upon perusal of the impugned F.I.R. and on the basis of the allegations made therein, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence against the petitioners is made out and hence the impugned F.I.R. is not liable to be quashed.
After having heard the learned counsel for the parties present and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as other material brought on record, we are not inclined to quash the impugned F.I.R.
However, in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, we dispose of this writ petition with the following conditions:-
1. The investigation of the aforesaid case shall go on but the petitioner nos. 2 to 5 shall not be arrested till the submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., subject to their extending full cooperation during investigation.
2. Qua petitioner no. 1, Arun Kumar, this writ petition stands dismissed. However, considering the nature of the allegations made in the F.I.R. and submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners, it is directed that in case he appears before the court concerned within thirty days from today and applies for bail, the same shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously by the courts below in view of the settled law laid by the Seven Judges' decision of this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2005 Cr.L.J. 755 as well as judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Order Date :- 31.10.2018 Sazia