Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
Heard Shri Dinesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Anurag Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State respondents and Shri R. K. Kidwai for the informant.
This petition has been filed for quashing of the F.I.R. No. 0024 of 2021, under Sections 302, 120-B, 34 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Raebareli with a further prayer to stay his arrest as well as making investigation against him.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that though the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and he has been assigned the role of exhortation, whereas the co-accused Furkhan had fired on the deceased, who succumbed to his injuries. He further submits that at the date and time of the incident, petitioner was in Lucknow in a restaurant, whereas the incident took place in Raebareli. He also submits that he also annexed CCTV footage for the said fact. It has also been submitted that the co-accused Furkhan, who was arrested by the police, was challaned under Section 3/25 of the Arms Act and the F.I.R. was lodged as F.I.R. No. 0027 of 2021 by the police and the presence of the petitioner has not been shown in the said F.I.R. It is, thus, submitted that the present F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.
Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer for quashing of the F.I.R. and submits that the plea of alibi, which has been raised by the petitioner, cannot be subject matter of the present writ petition. He further submits that the examination of the same is available to the petitioner during the course of the trial.
The Full Bench of this Court in Ajit Singh @ Muraha Vs. State of U.P. and others : (2006) 56 ACC 433 reiterated the view taken by the earlier Full Bench in Satya Pal Vs. State of U.P. and others : 2000 Cr.L.J. 569 after considering the various decisions including State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal and others : 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.
Further the Apex Court in the case of State of Telangana v. Habib Abdullah Jellani : (2017) 2 SCC 779 has disapproved an order restraining the Investigating Agencies arresting the accused where prayer of quashing the First Information Report has been refused.
The F.I.R. discloses cognizable offence and the petitioner has been assigned the role of exhortation. Hence, no ground exists for quashing of the F.I.R. or staying the arrest of the petitioners.
Accordingly, this writ petition fails and is dismissed.
(Rajeev Singh, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 21.1.2021 VKS