Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.
Heard Sri Syed Mohammad Abuzar Zaid, learned counsel for the petitioners, Ms. Meera Tripathi, learned AGA for the State/respondents no. 1 and 2 and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, Laxmi Narain, Sipahi Lal, Ankit, Bal Kishan, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the First Information Report dated 05.07.2021 registered as F.I.R. No. 0260 of 2021, under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506 I.P.C., police station Mohanlalganj, District Lucknow South (Commissionerate Lucknow) and also issue a writ of mandamus to the respondents no. 1 and 2 not to arrest or adopt any coercive measure against the petitioner on the basis of the aforesaid F.I.R.
It has been argued by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that on 05.07.2021, at 6:30 a.m., complainant/respondent no.3 was trying to disturb the possession of the petitioners' ancestral land by putting some wood and when the petitioners tried to stop in doing so, the complainant/respondent no.3 and his family members had attacked on the petitioners, due to which, petitioners sustained injuries. He argued that petitioner no.3, who is the son of the petitioner no.1, got fractured in his left hand and his injuries were examined at Community Health Centre, Mohanlalganj. He further argued that for the said incident, the respondent no.3/complainant has lodged F.I.R., which was registered as F.I.R. No. 0264 of 2021, under Sections 323/325/506 I.P.C., at Police Station Mohanlalganj, District Lucknow. He also argued that the allegations made in the impugned F.I.R. against the petitioners are absolutely false and vague as it has been lodged against the petitioners with mala fide intentions and just to harass them.
Learned AGA, on the other hand, opposed the prayer of the learned Counsel for the petitioners to quash the impugned F.I.R. and argued that there is cross version of the incident and both sides have received injuries in the said incident. Moreso, from perusal of the impugned F.I.R., it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner, hence the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
Having heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned AGA and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the facts that both sides have received injuries and also lodged F.I.R. for the incident and at the initial stage of investigation, it cannot be ascertained who is the aggressor in the said incident and further the impugned F.I.R. discloses cognizable offence, we are not inclined to interfere in the matter under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The writ petition lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
.
(Saroj Yadav, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 12.8.2021 Ajit/-