Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 16825 of 2018 Petitioner :- Lalu Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rahul Singh,Birendra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Rahul Singh, 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 of the F.I.R. dated 21.2.2018, registered as case crime no.28 of 2018, u/s 376, 313 IPC, P.S. Nandganj, district Ghazipur.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the victim who was a major girl has established live-in-relationship with the petitioner and became pregnant. Thereafter when the petitioner has refused to marry her, she lodged present FIR against the petitioner.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR and submitted that the statement of the prosecutrix u/s 164 Cr.P.C. has been recorded in which she has levelled allegation against the petitioner, hence FIR 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 petitioners.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 26.7.2018 Gaurav