Court No. - 47
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 34360 of 2018 Petitioner :- Smt. Girija Devi And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shyam Narayan Verma Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ram Surat Ram (Maurya),J. Hon'ble Anil Kumar-IX,J.
Heard Sri S.N. Verma for the petitioners and Additional Government Advocate for State.
The writ petition has been for quashing FIR dated 25.6.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 0607 of 2018, under Section 420, 406, 504 IPC, P.S. Lanka, Distt. Varanasi.
A perusal of the FIR indicates that in substance the allegation has been made that petitioners had enticed the informant and taken Rs. 7 lakh under the garb that she would be given Rs. 14,000/ and interest of Rs. 2000/- every month. Although the money was taken from the informant but nothing was paid to her. Thereafter the present FIR has been lodged, which clearly discloses the offence and it is not liable to be quashed.
However, the counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners lodged an FIR of Case Crime No. 0070 of 2018 against Pankaj Kumar Chaube, respondent-5, who had opened a company in the name of Future Growth Infrastructure Company Pvt. Ltd. and had taken money from various investors. When the police has pressurize Pankaj Kumar Chaube, respondent-5, then he colluded with the informant Smt. Samna Devi, respondent-4 got the present FIR registered against the petitioners. He also filed statement of accounts showing that Smt. Samna Devi, respondent-4 had opened account and deposited Rs. 5000/- per month in the company of respondent-
5. On its basis it has been stated that Smt. Samna Devi, respondent-4 had mala fide lodged the FIR under the pressure of Pankaj Kumar Chaube, respondent-5.
We have considered the arguments of the counsel for the petitioners.
At present, there is nothing on record to show that Smt. Samna Devi, respondent-4 is colluding with Pankaj Kumar Chaube, respondent-5 and lodged the present FIR against the petitioners. Otherwise also the FIR discloses the cognizable offence as such it is not liable to be quashed at this stage.
The writ petition has no merit and it is dismissed.
Order Date :- 29.11.2018 Rahul /-