Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11480 of 2019 Petitioner :- Dinesh Bihari Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashish Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J. Hon'ble Anil Kumar-IX,J.
Heard Sri Ashish Kumar Pandey, 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 21.11.2018, registered as Case Crime No. 0196 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 376, 342, 363 I.P.C., Police Station-Murad Nagar, District-Ghaziabad.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is being unnecessarily harassed on the basis of false allegations made against him. The co-accused Shashikant and another approached before another Bench and the Hon'ble Division Bench was pleased to grant interim protection to them vide order dated 11.4.2019. The role of the petitioner cannot be placed at different footing, while prima facie no cognizable offence is made out against him pursuant to the FIR lodged by the respondent no.3 Pinki. There is material inconsistency in the prosecution version which creates serious doubt about its veracity hence the FIR deserves to be quashed.
Per contra learned A.G..A contended that the allegations made in the first information report cannot be aborted at this stage. The first information report has been lodged by the victim herself narrating her agony and pain in natural manner. There is no embellishment in the prosecution version. The victim will not invite stigma upon her career by attributing false allegations upon others. The order dated 11.4.2019 has been obtained by the co-accused by placing the wrong and twisted facts. The conduct of the accused persons are highly contemptible and scornful hence the petitioner does not deserve any indulgence.
From the perusal of the FIR, prima facie it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner. The petitioner is involved in the serious offence which cannot be oversighted by this Court at this stage. The learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to put forth any justifiable ground for quashing of the F.I.R. or staying the arrest of the petitioner. The prayer for quashing the FIR is refused.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
However, it is provided that if the petitioner appears or surrenders before the Court concerned within thirty days from today and applies for bail in the aforesaid case, his prayer for bail shall be considered by the court below expeditiously in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 30.4.2019 Rahul.