Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10699 of 2018 Petitioner :- Deepak Agarwal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Devashish Mitra,Rahul Kumar Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Devashish Mitra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Siddhartha Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4, Sri N.K. Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
This petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. dated 18.4.2018 registered as case crime no. 126 of 2018 under sections 342, 352 I.P.C. and 23 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, police station Quila, District Bareilly.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the Principal of an institution where the son of respondent no. 4 studied since 2010. He submits that for the last six months his fees was not paid by the respondent no. 4 in spite of notices and satisfactory time being given to her though her son was allowed to appear in Class-VI examination and thereafter promoted to Class-VII. He submits that seeing the conduct of respondent no. 4, the school administration decided not to allow the son of the petitioner to carry on his studies in the said institution until the fees is deposited by respondent no. 4, hence the name of son of respondent no. 4 was struck off and he was not allowed to sit in the classroom and was directed to sit in the library which is an air-conditioned library, therefore no cruelty as alleged in the F.I.R. has ever been committed by the petitioner with the son of respondent no. 4. He submits that the petitioner is still ready to admit the son of respondent no. 4 subject to the condition that she shall deposit the fees regularly, hence the present F.I.R. is liable to be quashed by this Court.
Learned counsel for the respondent no. 4 and learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for quashing of the F.I.R. but could not dispute the fact that respondent no. 3 and her husband could not deposit the fee of their son Learned counsel for the respondent no. 4 states that looking to the financial conditional of the respondent no. 4 the petitioner may adopt some lenient view for deposit of the fees of her son by allowing her to deposit the same in some installments.
Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and nature of the allegations, it is directed that the petitioners shall not be arrested in above mentioned case, till the submission of the police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. but he shall co-operate with the investigation of the case.
It is further directed that looking to the financial condition of respondent no. 4, she may be allowed by the petitioner to pay the fees of her child in easy installments.
With the above direction this petition is finally disposed of.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 26.4.2018 Shiraz