Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11433 of 2019 Petitioner :- Deependra Patel Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sudhir Kumar Srivastava,Shivajee Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J. Hon'ble Anil Kumar-IX,J.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has invoked extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the FIR dated 10.4.2019 registered as Case Crime No.193 of 2019, under Section 2/3(i) of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Kareilly, District Prayagraj.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on the basis of the solitary case registered as case crime no.556 of 2018, under Sections 419,420,467,468,471 IPC at police station Kareilly, District Allahabad in which he has already been granted bail, the petitioner is being prosecuted in the present case with malafide intention. It is further submitted that the petitioner is neither the gang leader nor he is associated with any gang as member. Therefore, no offence under the Gangsters Act is made out against the petitioner who has been falsely implicated in the present case by the police authorities without any cogent reason with ulterior intention to confine him in jail.
Per contra the learned A.G.A. contended that the allegations contained in the first information report may not be nipped in the bud. There are sufficient material showing the complicity of the petitioner, who is associated with other accused persons in committing the offence. The innocence of the petitioner cannot be adjudged at this stage.
From the perusal of the first information report, it appears that on the basis of the allegations made therein, prima facie cognizable offence is made out. The petitioner has miserably failed to put forth any justifiable rationale for quashing the first information report. In the decision of Kishan Pal @ K.P. vs. State of U.P. and another, 2006 (54) ACC 1015, it has been held that it would not be proper in such matters for High Court to interfere in discretionary writ jurisdiction as the petitioner can always appear before the court concerned and make submission there. There is no ground for interference with the first information report. Therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned first information report is refused. The writ petition sans any merit and is accordingly dismissed.
However, considering the nature of the allegations made in the first information report and submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, it is directed that in case the petitioner appears before the court concerned within fourty five days from today and applies for bail, the same shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously by the courts below in accordance with the provision of the Gangsters Act.
Order Date :- 30.4.2019 M. Tariq