Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 30675 of 2018 Petitioner :- Dukhi And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Utsav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Krishna Pratap Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned FIR dated 25.09.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 258 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Bara, District Allahabad.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged by the respondent no. 3 after an inordinate and unexplained delay of three days. The petitioner no. 1 and the respondent no. 3 are the real brothers and partition suit between them is pending. Moreover apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned FIR lodged by the the respondent no. 3 alleging commission of offences by the petitioners under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., no evidence is forthcoming, even prima facie indicating that any such incident, as alleged in the FIR, had ever taken place and hence the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed.
Per contra learned AGA 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 for the reason that from the perusal of the impugned FIR and the allegations made therein it cannot be said that prima facie no cognizable offence is made out against the petitioners.
After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned FIR as well as the other material brought on record, we are not inclined to quash the impugned FIR.
However, considering the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner that in the present case litigation is still pending and some of the courts have decided the issue in favour of the petitioners, made in the impugned FIR, the provisions of section 157 Cr.P.C. and the view taken by the Apex Court in the case of Joginder Kumar Versus State of U.P. 1994 Cr.L.J., 1981, it is directed that the petitioner shall not be arrested in above mentioned case, till the credible evidence is not collected by the I.O. during pendency of the investigation.
With the above direction this petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 29.10.2018 SA