Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10881 of 2018 Petitioner :- Kanhaiya Jaiswal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Nasiruddin Warsi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Nasiruddin Warsi, learned counsel for the petitioner,Sri N.K.Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned FIR as well as material brought on record.
The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 21.7.2017, registered as Case Crime No.684 of 2017, under Sections 272, 273, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. and 60/62/63 Excise Act with Section 63 of Copyright Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Maharajganj.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR but during the course of investigation it has wrongly been mentioned by the Investigating Officer that Kanhaiya Jaiswal is the same person having the name of Vinod Patel but the petitioner is not the same person known as accused Vinod Patel. He further submits that the allegations levelled against the petitioner is absolutely false, frivolous and baseless. He argued that the co-accused have already been granted bail by the competent court. From a perusal of the FIR, no offence is made out against the petitioner, hence, the same be quashed.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR which discloses 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 petitioners. However, it is directed that that the Ccourt below while considering the bail application of the petitioner shall also consider the fact that co-accused have already been granted bail by the competent court.
With the above direction, the present writ petition stands disposed of.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
Order Date :- 30.4.2018/NS