Court No. - 2
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 16231 of 2019 Petitioner :- Narpat Singh And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Yogendra Pal Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J. Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 21.5.2019 registered as case crime 178 of 2019 under sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Dhalauna, District Hapur.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that accused petitioners are the father-in-law and the brother-in-law of the deceased who were living separate from the deceased and her husband; they have been falsely implicated in the present case. They have no role in the present offence.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for quashing of the F.I.R. stating that this is a case of murder as postmortem report indicates cause of death to be strangulation and throttling.
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.
(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.) (Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.) Order Date :- 11.6.2019 Meenu