Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10922 of 2018
Petitioner :- Mohd. Waseem And 6 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vindeshwari Prasad Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J. Hon'ble Mahboob Ali,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This writ petition has been filed with the prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F. I. R. which has been registered as Case Crime No. 11 of 2018, under Sections- 498A, 323, 504, 506, 377 IPC & 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S.- Mahila Thana, district- Bijnor.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that there is matrimonial dispute between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 3 and marriage has been solemnized the year 2015; on the earlier occasion matter was referred to the mediation centre, though the necessary amount has been deposited, but no one responds from the side of respondent and entire family members have been implicated in the present case on the basis of general allegations; much reliance has been placed upon paragraph nos. 9 to 13 to the affidavit accompanying the writ petition; apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned F.I.R., no evidence is forthcoming even prima facie indicating at the complicity of the petitioners in the commission of alleged offence and hence the impugned F.I.R. which is a bundle of lies and motivated by malice, is liable to be quashed.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the impugned F. I. R., it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out, hence the impugned F.I.R. is not liable to be quashed.
Having heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned first information as well as the other material brought on record, we are not inclined to quash the impugned F.I.R.
However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and also in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana; 2003(4) SCC 675 and Rajesh Sharma and others v. State of U.P. and others decided on 27.7.2017 passed in Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.2013 of 2017, we dispose of this writ petition with the direction that the petitioners shall not be arrested in the aforementioned case till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. However, petitioners shall participate and co-operate with the investigation and the police authorities are directed to conclude the investigation as early as possible.
With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.4.2018 Ujjawal