Court No. - 43
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 2734 of 2019 Petitioner :- Gajendra Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajendra Prasad Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J. Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.
Heard Sri Rajendra Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A.N. Mulla, learned AGA for the State.
This writ petition has been filed for seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent concerned to conduct fair investigation in pursuance of FIR dated 13.10.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 254 of 2018 under Sections 379, 411, 147, 109, 352, 353 I.P.C. 2/3 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, 1957, PS Month District Jhansi.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The allegations levelled against him are absolutely false, frivolous and baseless. From a perusal of the FIR, no offence is made out against the petitioner, hence, the same be quashed.
Learned A.G.A, opposed the prayer for quashing of the F.I.R, which discloses cognizable offence.
The Full Bench of this Court in Ajit Singh @ Muraha v. State of U.P. (2006 (56) ACC 433) reiterated the view taken by the earlier Full Bench in Satya Pal v. State of U.P. (2000 Cr.L.J. 569) after considering the various decisions including State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (AIR 1992 SC 604) that there can be no interference with the investigation or order staying arrest unless cognizable offence is not ex-facie discernible from the allegations contained in the F.I.R. or there is any statutory restriction operating on the power of the Police to investigate a case.
From the perusal of the FIR, prima facie it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out. Hence, no ground exists for quashing of the F.I.R or staying the arrest of the petitioner.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 31.1.2019/Ram Murti