Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 25277 of 2018 Petitioner :- Manish Sonkar And 07 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 02 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajiv Chowdhury Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Ravindra Nath Kakkar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned FIR dated 25.07.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 30 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 313, 377, 354, 376, 392, 354-C IPC and section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Varanasi..
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the impugned FIR has been lodged by Smt. Gudiya @ Shahiba Sidiqi, respondent no. 3 roping in the entire family of her husband including her Father-in-law, Mother-in-law, sister-in-law, maternal father-in-law and brothers- in-law, petitioner nos. 2 to 8 alleging commission of offences by them under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 313, 392, 354-C IPC and section 3/4 D.P. Act. The specific allegation with regard to commission of offence under section 377 has been made by her against her husband petitioner no. 1 and commission of offence undere section 376 has been made against petitioner no. 6 Amit Sonkar. The offence under section 354 and 354-C have been attributed to petitioner no. 8 Beeru Sonkar. He next submitted that apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned FIR no credible evidence whatsoever is coming forth even prima facie indicating at the petitioners complicity in the commission of the alleged crime and for the aforesaid reason the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed.
Per contra learned A.G.A. submitted that from the perusal of the impugned FIR and on the basis of the allegation made therein, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is disclosed against the petitioners.
After having heard learned counsel for the parties present and perused the impugned FIR, we are not inclined to quash the same.
However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we direct that investigation of the aforesaid case shall go on but the petitioners no. 2 to 5, 7 and 8 shall not be arrested till the submission of police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. subject to their extending full co-operation during investigation. So far as petitioner nos. 1 and 6 are concerned, it is directed that in case the petitioner nos. 1 and 6 appear before the court concerned within thirty days from today and apply for bail, the same shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously, if possible, on the same day by the courts below in view of the settled law laid by the Seven Judges' decision of this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2005 Cr. L. J. 755 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
With the aforesaid direction, this petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 12.9.2018 RPD