Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 18013 of 2018 Petitioner :- Nagendra Bahadur Singh And 8 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dharmendra Kumar Srivastava,Satya Dheer Singh Jadaun Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ajeet Singh,Sanjay Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
In Re: Criminal Misc. Restoration Application No. 2 of 2018.
Shri S.D.S. Jadaun, learned counsel for the applicants-petitioners and Shri Ajeet Singh, learned counsel for the private-respondents as well as Shri Deepak Mishra, learned AGA are present.
Cause shown for non appearance of the counsel on the date fixed has satisfactorily been explained.
Restoration application is allowed.
Order dated 3.8.2018 is recalled and the writ petition is restored to its original number.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 27.8.2018 Sumaira
Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 18013 of 2018 Petitioner :- Nagendra Bahadur Singh And 8 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dharmendra Kumar Srivastava,Satya Dheer Singh Jadaun Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ajeet Singh,Sanjay Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Shri S.D.S. Jadaun, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Ajeet Singh, learned counsel for the private-respondents as well as Shri Deepak Mishra, learned AGA are present.
This petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. registered as case crime no.155 of 2018 under sections 147, 452, 354 (Kha), 286, 323, 504 and 506 IPC, police station Industrial Area, district Allahabad.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that there is only allegation against the petitioners for outraging the modesty and the allegations have been exaggerated by private-respondent No. 3.
Learned counsel for private-respondent No. 3 submits that there is cross report of the incident and both sides have received injuries.
Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that petitioner Nos. 8 and 9 are 82 and 78 years old persons, but the learned counsel for the private-respondents has tried to dispute the age of the petitioners and states that no documentary evidence has been annexed regarding age.
Moreover, the writ petition No. 22285 of 2018 filed by the respondent No. 3 challenging the impugned FIR lodged from side of the petitioners has been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 14.8.2018.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for quashing of the F.I.R. which discloses cognizable offence.
The Full Bench of this Court in Ajit Singh @ Muraha v. State of U.P. (2006 (56) ACC 433) reiterated the view taken by the earlier Full Bench in Satya Pal v. State of U.P. (2000 Cr.L.J. 569) after considering the various decisions including State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (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.
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.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 27.8.2018 Sumaira