Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10631 of 2018 Petitioner :- Harish Chandra Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shyam Lal Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Shyam Lal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri N.K. Verma, learned AGA for the State and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
The relief sought in this petition is for quashing the impugned prosecution of the petitioner u/s 420, 109, 120-B, 182, 211, 34 IPC arising out of FIR dated 15.3.2018, registered as case crime no.178 of 2018, u/s 354, 376, 392 IPC and 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act, P.S. Kotwali Kannauj, district Kannauj.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is the constable. He was also roped in the present case along with respondent no.3 who is the informant of the case who lodged FIR against some persons u/s 354, 376, 392, 3(2)(V) SC/ST Act which was found during the investigation to be false and thereafter proceedings have been initiated against them on the basis of case registered against the petitioner and respondent no.3 u/s 420, 109, 120-B, 182, 211, 34 IPC. It is stated that the respondent no.3 has got herself bailed out in the said case. The allegations made against the petitioner are absolutely false, frivolous and baseless, hence present FIR be quashed.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR which discloses the cognizable offence.
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 the 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 petitioner. The prayer for quashing the FIR is refused.
However, the court below while considering the bail application of the petitioner shall consider the fact that co-accused has already been granted bail by the competent court, if the petitioner moves bail application before the court below.
With the aforesaid direction, this petition is finally disposed of.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 26.4.2018/Gaurav