Court No. - 43
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 37361 of 2018 Petitioner :- Jagatpal Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J. Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.
Heard Sri Rohit Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A.
The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 13.10.2018 in Case Crime No.0494/2018, under Sections 420/467/468/471 IPC, P.S. Barsana, Mathura.
The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner procured an employment in Purva Madhyamik Vidyalay, Badangarh, on forged and fabricated documents.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the informant / Principal already stood suspended, FIR is malafidely motivated, which has been lodged without any fact finding inquiry.
Per contra, the learned A.G.A submits there is no legal bar for informant / Principal to lodge the FIR, even if he is under suspension and the FIR is an outcome of a fact finding inquiry as evident from the FIR, cognizable offence is made out, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
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 writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 19.12.2018 Chandra