Court No. - 4
Criminal Misc. Impleadment Application of 2018 IN Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 26213 of 2018 Petitioner :- Smt. Geeta Devi And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Dubey,Chandra Bhan Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Ravindra Nath Kakkar,J.
For the reasons given in the accompanying affidavit, the impleadment application is allowed.
Learned counsel for the petitioners is permitted to implead Anuj Modanwal (husband), Mohan (jeth) and Bablu (jeth) as petitioner nos. 5, 6 and 7.
Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of respondent no. 4 in the Court today which is kept on record.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 10.08.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 149 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 452, 376, 354, 308 I.P.C., P.S.- Kapsethi, District- Varanasi.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged by the respondent no. 4 roping in her mother-in-law petitioner no. 1, Smt. Geeta Devi, sister-in-law petitioner no. 2, Neetu (nanad), sister-in-law petitioner no. 3, Reeta Devi (jethani), sister-in-law petitioner no. 4, Jyoti (jethani), husband petitioner no. 5, Anuj Modanwal, brother-in-law petitioner no. 6, Mohan (jeth) and brother-in-law petitioner no. 7, Bablu (jeth) containing absolutely false and concocted allegations regarding commission of offences by them u/s 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 452, 354, 308 I.P.C. Specific allegations regarding commission of offence u/s 376 I.P.C. has been made against petitioner no. 6, Mohan (jeth) and petitioner no. 7, Bablu (jeth). 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.
Per contra learned A.G.A. submitted that upon perusal of the impugned F.I.R. and on the basis of the allegations made therein, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence against the petitioners is made out and hence the impugned F.I.R. is not liable to be quashed.
After having heard the learned counsel for the parties present and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as other material brought on record, we are not inclined to quash the impugned F.I.R.
However, in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, we dispose of this writ petition with the following conditions:-
1. The investigation of the aforesaid case shall go on but the petitioner nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 shall not be arrested till the submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., subject to their extending full cooperation during investigation.
2. Qua petitioner no. 5, Anuj Modanwal, this writ petition stands dismissed. 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 he appears before the court concerned within thirty days from today and applies for bail, the same shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously by the courts below in view of the settled law laid 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 as well as judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Order Date :- 24.9.2018 KS