Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 23188 of 2018
Petitioner :- Mahaveer
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Jahar Singh (Kashyap),Stuti Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri J.S. Kashyap, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Narendra Kumar Tiwari, learned Brief Holder appearing 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 29.9.2917 registered as Case Crime No. 459 of 2017, under Sections 307, 325, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station- Subhash Nagar, District Kashganj.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner happens to be brother-in-law (Sarhu) of respondent no. 3 and it is stated that the wife of respondent no. 3 namely Archana has illicit relationship with the petitioner. In this regard, the informant (respondent no. 3) lodged an Fir against the petitioner and co-accused Archana. Thereafter she was arrested. It was further submitted that as per the medical examination of the informant, there was no injury present on the person of the informant except only one injury in his right palm. It was also submitted that co- accused Archana has already been granted bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for quashing of the F.I.R. 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. The prayer for the same is hereby refused.
However, if the petitioner moves bail application before the court below, the court below while considering his bail application shall take into account the aforesaid fact as has been argued by learned counsel for the petitioner.
The writ petition stands disposed of.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
Order Date :- 24.8.2018 Puspendra