Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 26871 of 2018 Petitioner :- Dhirendra Chaudhary And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Srivastava,Gaurav Singh Chauhan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Ravindra Nath Kakkar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the prayer to quash the F.I.R. dated 30.08.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 336 of 2018, under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 313 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, PS Kotwali Nagar, District Aligarh.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the allegations made in the impugned FIR regarding commission of offence by the petitioners under aforesaid sections are palpably false and moreover the same do not disclose any cognizable offence. The impugned FIR is thus liable to be quashed.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that concealing the material fact that divorce decree obtained by the first husband of respondent No. 3 had been set aside and the suit for divorce was pending between respondent No. 3 and her first husband, she solemnized marriage with petitioner No. 1. When the aforesaid fact came to know by the petitioner No. 1, he filed a suit for dissolution of marriage against respondent No. 3 and as a counter blast the impugned FIR has been lodged against the petitioners under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 313 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act. 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.
From the perusal of the F.I.R., it appears that on the basis of the allegations made therein, prima facie cognizable offence is made out. There is no ground for interference with the F.I.R. Therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned F.I.R. is refused.
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 the petitioners appear before the court concerned within thirty days from today and apply 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).
It is further provided that if the investigation in this matter has been completed and police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. has been filed, the petitioners shall not be entitled to any benefit of this order.
With the above directions, this petition is disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 25.9.2018 Sazia