Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11215 of 2019
Petitioner :- Nasim Ahmad And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- S.K. Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Vinay Kumar,Vinay Kr.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J. Hon'ble Ifaqat Ali Khan,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner(s), Sri Vinay Kumar, learned counsel for respondent no. 4 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This writ petition has been filed with the prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F. I. R. which has been registered as Case Crime No. 0125/2019, under Sections- 419, 420, 406, 506 IPC, P.S.- Tiwaripur, district- Gorakhpur.
Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submitted that the impugned first information report has been lodged by the complainant-respondent containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against the petitioner(s) with the ulterior intention of harassing the petitioners; entire family members have been implicated in the present case on the basis of general allegations; much reliance has been placed upon paragraph nos. 2 to 5 to the affidavit accompanying the writ petition; apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned F.I.R., no evidence is forthcoming even prima facie indicating at the complicity of the petitioner(s) in the commission of alleged offence and hence the impugned F.I.R. which is a bundle of lies and motivated by malice, is liable to be .
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the impugned F. I. R., it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out.
Having heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned first information as well as the other material brought on record, we are not inclined to quash the impugned F.I.R.
So far as petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are concerned, the following order is being passed;
After hearing learned counsel for petitioners and learned AGA, it is directed that in case, petitioner nos. 1 and 2 appear and surrender before the court below within 60 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. For a period of 60 days from today or till petitioner nos. 1 and 2 surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against petitioner nos. 1 and 2. However, in case, petitioner nos. 1 and 2 do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
So far as petitioner nos. 3 and 4 are concerned, the following order is being passed;
Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and also in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana; 2003(4) SCC 675 and Rajesh Sharma and others v. State of U.P. and others decided on 27.7.2017 passed in Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.2013 of 2017, we dispose of this writ petition with the direction that petitioner nos. 3 and 4 shall not be arrested in the aforementioned case till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. However, petitioner nos. 3 and 4 shall participate and co-operate with the investigation.
With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition is finally disposed off.
Order Date :- 30.4.2019 Kuldeep