Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Mohd. Sammu & Ors. vs State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. ...

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|18 May, 2021

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner no. 1, learned A.G.A. for the State and Shri Ajay Pratap Singh, learned counsel for contesting opposite party.
The challenge herein is to a First Information Report dated 03.05.2021 bearing Case Crime No. 0134 of 2021 alleging commission of an offence by the petitioners under Sections 147, 148, 307, 504, 506, 427 I.P.C, Police Station- Baldirai, District- Sultanpur.
Learned counsel for petitioners fairly informed the Court that Petitioner nos. 2 and 3 have been arrested, whereas, petitioner nos. 4 and 5 have applied for grant of anticipatory bail. He therefore presses the writ petition only with regard to petitioner no. 1.
In view of the aforesaid statement the writ petition so far as it relates to petitioner nos. 2, 3, 4, and 5 is dismissed.
We have perused the first information report and based on it we can not say at this stage that no cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner no.1 which is subject of course to investigation.
As regards the contention of learned counsel for petitioner no. 1 that the F.I.R. has been falsely lodged on account of enmity due to Gram Panchayat Elections, whereas, no such incident alleged had taken place. This is a question of fact and it will have to be ascertained during investigation as to whether the incident had taken place or not. Merely because there was prior enmity this by itself does not mean that no incident as alleged can occur and if it is alleged then it is malafide. At present there is not enough material before this Court to reasonably infer any malafide, but all this issue is left open to be considered during investigation and no conclusive opinion is expressed in this regard.
As regards the contention of learned counsel for petitioner no. 1 regarding Section 307 I.P.C. not being attracted if it is found during investigation that there is no evidence for the said offence, then, the needful would be done by the Investigation Officer.
For all these reasons, the writ petition is dismissed but without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner in the pending investigation.
It is open for the petitioner no. 1 to avail the remedies under Section 438/439 I.P.C. as per law.
Order Date :- 18.5.2021 R.K.P.
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Mohd. Sammu & Ors. vs State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. ...

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
18 May, 2021
Judges
  • Rajan Roy
  • Saurabh Lavania