Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
The Court has been convened through video conferencing.
Heard Sri Ramendra Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri D.S. Rana, learned AGA for the State and perused the impugned First Information Report and the material on record.
The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners, namely, Malkhe and Sakta seeking quashing of the First Information Report dated 9.4.2021, registered as F.I.r. No.131 of 2021, under Sections 2(B), (ii)/3 of U.P. Gangster and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, police station Rampur Mathura, District Sitapur with a further prayer to stay the arrest during the pendency of the investigation of the said case.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case on the basis of one case mentioned in the gang chart against each of the petitioners, i.e., against petitioner no.1 bearing Case Crime No.74 of 2021, under Section 60(2) of the Excise Act, P.S. Rampur Mathura, District Sitapur, whereas against petitioner no.2 bearing Case Crime No.77 of 2021, under Section 60(2) of the Excise Act, P.S. Rampur Mathura, District Sitapur, copy of which is annexed as Annexure-2 to the present petition. So far as petitioner no.1 is concerned, he has not been arrested in the aforesaid case, whereas petitioner no.2 has already got himself bailed out in the said case. He further submits that the petitioners are neither members of any gang nor run any gang involved in anti-social activities. The allegations levelled against the petitioners are absolutely false, frivolous and baseless just for harassment, hence the present F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the First Information Report and argued that simply because one case has been shown against the petitioners in the Gang Chart and in that case they have been granted bail, cannot be a ground for quashing the impugned FIR as from perusal of the FIR it discloses cognizable offence, therefore, the present writ petition be dismissed.
The Full Bench of this Court in Ajit Singh @ Muraha Vs. State of U.P. and others : (2006) 56 ACC 433 reiterated the view taken by the earlier Full Bench in Satya Pal Vs. State of U.P. and others : 2000 Cr.L.J. 569 after considering the various decisions including State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal and others : 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.
Further the Apex Court in the case of State of Telangana v. Habib Abdullah Jellani : (2017) 2 SCC 779 has disapproved an order restraining the Investigating Agencies arresting the accused where prayer of quashing the First Information Report has been refused.
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.
Accordingly, this writ petition fails and is dismissed.
The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by it alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 31.5.2021NS/Asheesh