Court No. - 40
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 4994 of 2018 Petitioner :- Mukesh Kumar And 04 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 03 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vijay Gautam,Ambarish Chatterji Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Sri Vijay Gautam, learned counsel for the five petitioners before us who prays for quashing of the FIR in Case Crime No. 0191 of 2018 under Sections 376, 313, 506, 504, 323, 120(B) IPC & 3(2), 5(D) SC/ST Act, Police Station- Kotwali City, District- Bijnor.
The allegation against the petitioner no. 1, Mukesh Kumar who is a constable in the Uttar Pradesh Police and Priti who is the respondent no. 4 is also a female constable in the Uttar Pradesh Police were in a sort of alleged living relationship for the past one and a half year. The FIR alleges that the petitioner no. 1 had indulged in the forced abortion of the pregnancy of the respondent no. 4 during this period and the respondent no. 4 had been pressing hard for a formal marriage. According to the respondent no. 4, the petitioner no. 1 and his family virtually backed out from the relationship and this entire episode therefore discloses the Commission of the offences as disclosed in the FIR.
Sri Gautam, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no. 1 and the respondent no. 4 are both in the police station of neighbouring districts. As a matter of fact, the FIR itself discloses a past alleged living relationship. In the aforesaid circumstances, the allegation of Commission of the offences without there being any material to substantiate it is a mere bald allegation with a view to pressurize the petitioners into a formal matrimonial alliance with the respondent no. 4. It is for this reason that the other members of the family namely, the petitioner nos. 2 to 5 which includes three ladies and the brother of the petitioner no. 1 have been implicated. It is urged that so far as the petitioner nos. 2 to 5 are concerned their implication is without any basis and is absolutely false.
Learned AGA on the other hand contends that the disclosure in the FIR refers to cognizable offences having been allegedly committed and as such no case is made out for quashing of the FIR.
Having gone through the contents of the FIR and the aforesaid background, we see no reason to quash the FIR at this stage.
However looking to the background of the allegation of living relationship of the petitioner no. 1 with that of the respondent no. 4, we provide that so far as the petitioner nos. 2 to 5 are concerned they shall not be subjected to any coercive steps or shall be arrested till submission of police report or collection of credible evidence whichever is earlier.
The petitioner no. 1 shall be entitled to seek remedy for bail before the appropriate forum or remedy before such other forum as may be departmentally available to him. It is also open to the parties to negotiate any settlement in case there is a possibility of the same.
The writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid direction and the observations.
Order Date :- 27.2.2018 S.Chaurasia