Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 26254 of 2018 Petitioner :- Smt. Chandrakali And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 03 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohan Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Dharam Pal Singh,Manoj Kumar Pandey,S. Niranjan
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Counter-affidavit has been filed by learned counsel for the private respondent on behalf of respondent no.4 today, which is taken on record.
Heard Sri Mohan Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Dharam Pal Singh, learned senior advocate assisted by Sri S. Niranjan, learned counsel for the private respondent no.4, Sri A.R. Chaurasia, learned A.G.A. for the State and impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to arrest the petitioners and with further prayer for quashing the impugned FIR dated 21.6.2018 registered as case crime no. 150 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, P.S. Bara, District Allahabad.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioner no.1 is the vendee of the property in question and petitioner no.2 is the witness of the said sale-deed; the petitioner no.1 is a bona fide purchaser. It is further submitted that apart from the bald allegations made in the FIR, no credible evidence whatsoever is forthcoming even prima facie indicating the petitioners' complicity in the commission of the alleged offence qua the petitioner no.2, hence the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed.
Learned counsel for the private respondent no.4 states that the property belongs to late Pandit Yadunandan Prasad Upadhyay, who had died on 30.05.1996, a copy of the death certificate has been annexed at page no.13 as annexure-CA4 to which learned counsel for the petitioners states that the photograph of the person, who was the vendor, has been pasted on the sale-deed in question. The petitioners appeared before the Sub-Registrar, who had identified the person, vendor and vendee, and the witness of the executed sale-deed. Hence there appears to be no offence made out as disclosed by petitioner no.1 and the same has been disputed by counsel for the respondent no.4 but the counsel for the petitioners could not dispute the death certificate of Sri Yadunandan Prasad Upadhyay, who had died in the year 1996.
Per contra learned AGA for the State submitted that the impugned FIR is not liable to be quashed on the basis of the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners.
After having heard learned counsel for the parties present and perused the impugned FIR as well as the other material brought on record, we dispose of this writ petition with the following directions:
(i) Investigation of the aforesaid case shall go on but the petitioner no.1 shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case till the submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., subject to their cooperation during investigation.
(ii) As far as the petitioner no. 1 is concerned, the petition stand dismissed.
With this direction, this petition is finally disposed of.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 25.9.2018 JK Yadav