Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 15251 of 2019 Petitioner :- Navnit Talwar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vibhu Rai,Anoop Trivedi (Senior Adv.),Mohd. Rashid Siddiqui Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J. Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Anoop Trivedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Aishwarya Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 and Sri V.K. Pandey, 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. 171 of 2019, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 506 IPC, P.S. Icotec-III, District Gautambuddha Nagar.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned first information report has been lodged by the complainant- respondent containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against the petitioner with the ulterior intention of harassing the petitioner; it is a purely civil dispute; that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case; the matter needs deeper and fairer investigation before any arrest should be given effect to and the petitioner will participate and cooperate with the investigation; 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 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 quashed.
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, hence the impugned F.I.R. is not liable to be quashed.
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.
However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, we dispose of this writ petition with the direction that the petitioner shall not be arrested in the aforementioned case till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. However, petitioner shall participate and co-operate with the investigation and police authorities shall conclude the investigation as expeditiously as possible. The police report will be submitted within a period of three months.
At this stage, Sri Anoop Trivedi, learned Senior Advocate has raised objection to the effect that the Court may also safeguard the interest of the first informant and petitioner may be restrained from changing the nature of the property in dispute.
Accordingly, it is directed that the petitioner will maintain that the director of the concerned company will not change the nature of the property till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.
With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.5.2019 SR