Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 26339 of 2017 Petitioner :- Munni Devi And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amit Kumar Srivastava,Raj Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajesh Dayal Khare,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 by the petitioner with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. dated 10.09.2017 lodged in Case Crime No.214 of 2017, under Section 409 I.P.C., Police Station Pahari, District Chitrakoot.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioner no.1 is ex-pradhan, petitioner no.2 is the the Village Panchayat Raj Officer and the petitioner no.3 is a contractor/supplier of sand (Morang) and the allegations is that the Morang which was purchased amounting to Rs. 93 lacs was not used. Learned counsel further contends that the Technical Assistant, who was also named in the present case has been granted protection by another Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.10.2017 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 21869 of 2017, copy of which order is annexed as Annexure-6 to the writ petition. Learned counsel further contends that although the role of Technical Assistant has been distinguishable by the said order wherein it has been observed that the role of said Technical Assistant comes after construction. Learned counsel further contends that the said Morang could not be used due to election as well as rainy season subsequently, the same was used. It is thus contended that initiation of the present proceedings is bad in law. He further submitted that apart from the bald allegations made in the F.I.R., which is a bundle of lies and product of malice, no credible evidence is forthcoming, even prima facie, indicating that any such incident had taken place, hence the impugned F. I. R. is liable to be quashed.
Per contra, learned A. G. A. submitted that from the perusal of 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.
From the perusal of the F.I.R. it appears that on the basis of the allegations made therein prima facie cognizable offence is made out hence, there is no scope for interfering with the impugned F.I.R.
Therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned F. I. R. is refused. However, considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners and nature of allegations made in the F. I. R., it is directed that the petitioners shall not be arrested in the aforementioned case till submission of police report under Section 173 (2) or till credible evidence is collected, whichever is earlier.
With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition is disposed of finally Order Date :- 28.11.2017 S.Ali