Court No. - 47
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 17750 of 2020 Petitioner :- Mohsin Ali @ Mohsin Ali Khan Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dhananjai Rai,Vibhu Rai Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Subhash Chand,J.
Heard Sri Vibhu Rai,learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Manju Thakur, learned AGA for the State and perused the First Information Report and the material on record.
The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Mohsin Ali @ Mohsin Ali Khan, seeking quashing of the First Information Report of Case Crime No.492 of 2020, under Sections 153(A) I.P.C. and 67 of Information Technology Act (amended) 2008, Police Station Station Civil Lines, District Aligarh with a further prayer to stay of their arrest during the pendency of the investigation of the said case.
Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The petitioner is a Class-IV employee in BRC Atrauli. He further argued that the F.I.R. has been lodged alleging therein that the petitioner has posted certain illegal posts which have enlarge the sentiments of particular community, which is absolutely false as a face-book post of the petitioner has been taken as to be against the sentiments of certain community and the F.I.R. has been lodged against the petitioner on the pretext of the same. No offence is made out against the petitioner, hence, F.I.R. is liable to be quashed by this Court.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the First Information Report and argued that from the perusal of the First Information Report, a cognizable offence is made out against the petitioners, and 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.
(Subhash Chand, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 8.1.2021 NS