Court No. - 40
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 33915 of 2018 Petitioner :- Neeraj And 5 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Chandra Prakash Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to quash the impugned F.I.R. registered as Case Crime no. 953 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Dankaur, District- Gautam Budh Nagar.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the impugned first information report has been lodged by the respondent no.3 containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against the petitioners with the ulterior intention of harassing them. It is next submitted that the dispute which is the subject matter of the impugned F.I.R. has been amicably settled by the parties outside the Court and they have entered into a compromise dated 15.11.2018, a copy whereof has been brought on record as Annexure No.2 to the writ petition. It is further submitted that since the parties have entered into a compromise and respondent no.3 no longer desires to proceed any further in this matter and the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.
Sri Ajit Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No.3 has not disputed the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners.
However, Sri A.K. Sand, learned AGA has submitted that the offence in question is against the State and society and the F.I.R. in such a case can not be quashed on the basis of compromise. In support of his submission he has placed reliance upon the judgment of Apex Court in the case of State of M.P. Vs. Deepak and others (2014) 10 SCC 285 in Criminal Appeal No. 1985 of 2014.
After having heard learned counsel for the parties and peculiar facts and circumstances of this case we dispose of the writ petition with the direction that the investigation of this case shall go on and the petitioners shall not be arrested till the submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.
It is further made clear that the Investigating Officer may take note of the compromise entered into between the parties in case the same is filed before him during the course of the investigation.He further submitted that 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 petitioners in the commission of the alleged crime and hence the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. submitted that the impugned F.I.R. is not liable to be quashed on the basis of the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners.
From the perusal of the impugned F.I.R., it appears that on the basis of the allegations made therein prima-facie cognizable offence is made out. There is no scope of interfering in the F.I.R, therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned F.I.R. is refused.
However, considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners and the nature of the allegations made in the F.I.R., it is directed that till the submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., the petitioners shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case subject to their extending full cooperation during investigation.
With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 27.11.2018 Abhishek