Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10453 of 2018 Petitioner :- Harendra And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Girish Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 10.04.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 10 of 2018, under Sections 323, 504, 498-A, 307 IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Bulandshaher.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that there is a matrimonial dispute between the husband and wife; the marriage is of the year 2014 and the incident is also of the year 2014; husband and wife are living separately since 14th August, 2014; much reliance has been placed upon paragraph nos. 11, 12 and 16 of the writ petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that the impugned FIR has been lodged by the complainant-respondent no.3 containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against the petitioners with the ulterior intention of harassing the petitioners; entire family members have been implicated on the basis of general allegation; apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned F.I.R., no evidence is forthcoming even prima facie indicating at the complicity of the petitioners in the commission of alleged offence and hence the impugned F.I.R., which is a bundle of lies and motivated by malice, is liable to be quashed.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the impugned F.I.R., it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out, hence the impugned F.I.R. is not liable to be quashed.
After having heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned first information as well as the other material brought on record, we are not inclined to quash the impugned F.I.R.
However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and also keeping in view the law as laid down by the Apex Court in the case of B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana; 2003 (4) SCC 675, and Rajesh Sharma and Others v. State of U.P. And others (SLP (Crl.) No. 2013 of 2017 decided on 27.7.2017, we dispose of this writ petition with the direction that the petitioners shall not be arrested in the aforementioned case till submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., however, petitioners shall participate and co-operate with the investigation.
With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 24.4.2018 Nadim