Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 31230 of 2018 Petitioner :- Mohammad Gulshad Abdal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Krishna Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Krishna Pratap Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned FIR dated 3.9.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 175 of 2018, under Sections 379, 411, 279, 336, 431, 432, 120-B I.P.C. and Sections 4 and 21 of Mines and Mineral (Regulation of Development) Act 1957 and Sections 3 and 5 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, P.S. Panwari, District Mahoba.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is neither arrested on the spot nor any recovery has been made from him and he has been nominated as accused in the F.I.R. on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused who was arrested on the spot. Moreover apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned FIR lodged by the the respondent no. 3 alleging commission of offences by the petitioner under Sections Sections 379, 411, 279, 336, 431, 432, 120-B I.P.C. and Sections 4 and 21 of Mines and Mineral (Regulation of Development) Act 1957 and Sections 3 and 5 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, no evidence is forthcoming, even prima facie indicating the petitioner's complicity and hence the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed.
Per contra learned AGA submitted that the impugned FIR is not liable to be quashed on the basis of the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner for the reason that from the perusal of the impugned FIR and the allegations made therein it cannot be said that prima facie no cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner.
After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned FIR as well as the other material brought on record, we are not inclined to quash the impugned FIR.
However, considering the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner that in the present case litigation is still pending and some of the courts have decided the issue in favour of the petitioner, made in the impugned FIR, the provisions of section 157 Cr.P.C. and the view taken by the Apex Court in the case of Joginder Kumar Versus State of U.P. 1994 Cr.L.J., 1981, it is directed that the petitioner shall not be arrested in above mentioned case, till the credible evidence is not collected by the I.O. during pendency of the investigation.
With the above direction this petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 31.10.2018/SA