Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 30690 of 2018 Petitioner :- Balram Sharma And 5 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Yogendra Pal Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Krishna Pratap Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 01.10.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 470 of 2018, under Sections 498A, 323, 354, 377, 307, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S.
Mundali, District Meerut.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged by the respondent no. 3, Smt. Preeti Sharma, wife of petitioner no. 1, Balram Sharma roping in the entire family of her husband including his father, mother, brother, sister-in-law (bhbabhi) and sister falsely alleging commission of offence by them under Sections 498A, 323, 354, 307, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act. The allegation regarding commission of offence under Section 377 I.P.C. has been made against the petitioner no. 1, Balram Sharma alone. As regards the offence under Section 307, there is neither any injury report of the respondent no.
3 on record nor any other material corroborating the commission of aforesaid offences by the petitioners. Moreover apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned F.I.R., no credible evidence whatsoever is forthcoming even prima facie indicating at the petitioners' complicity and hence the impugned FIR qua petitioner nos. 2 to 6 is liable to be quashed.
Per contra learned A.G.A. submitted that from the perusal of the impugned FIR and on the basis of the allegation made therein, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is disclosed against the petitioners.
After having heard learned counsel for the parties present and perused the impugned FIR, we are not inclined to quash the same.
However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we direct that investigation of the aforesaid case shall go on but the petitioner nos. 2 to 6 shall not be arrested till the submission of police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. subject to their extending full co-operation during investigation.
As far as petitioner no. 1, Balram Sharma is concerned, who is the husband of the respondent no. 3, Smt. Preeti Sharma, the petition stands dismissed. However, 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 down 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 which has been affirmed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) With the aforesaid directions, this petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 29.10.2018 SA