Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 37983 of 2018 Petitioner :- Smt. Gayatri Devi And 6 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ray Sahab Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard Sri Ray Sahab Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri N.K. Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State, perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
This petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to quash the impugned FIR dated 02.12.2018 arising out of Case Crime No.1186 of 2018 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 354, 323, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C.
and sections 3(1)(Da) and 3(1)(Dha) S.C./S.T. Act, P.S. Kotwali Orai, District Jalaun.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for quashing of the F.I.R. which discloses cognizable offence and also pointed out that the victim has sustained injuries but the injury report has not been annexed.
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 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 petitioners.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Raj Beer Singh, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 21.12.2018 Madhurima