Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 24368 of 2018 Petitioner :- Nishant And 5 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Chandra Prakash Pandey
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Shashi Kant,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 issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 15.08.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 55 of 2018 under Sections 498A, 323, 506, 307 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D. P. Act, P.S.- Mahila Thana, District- Baghpat.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged by the respondent no. 4, Smt. Jyoti roping in the entire family of his daughter's husband petitioner no. 1, Nishant including petitioner no. 2,Ramesh Pal (Sasur), petitioner no. 3, Pushpa Devi (Saas), petitioner no. 4, Shivam (Devar), petitioner no. 5, Aakansha (sister-in- law), petitioner no. 6, Rahul (brother-in-law) falsely alleging commission of offences by them under Sections 498A, 323, 506, 307 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D. P. Act. He further submitted that apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned F.I.R., no credible evidence whatsoever is coming forth even prima facie indicating at the complicity of the petitioners in the commission of the alleged crime and the impugned F.I.R., which is a bundle of lies and product of malice, is liable to be quashed.
Per contra Sri J. K. Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. submitted that upon perusal of the impugned F.I.R. and on the basis of the allegations made therein, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence against the petitioners is made out and hence the impugned F.I.R. is not liable to be quashed.
After having heard the learned counsel for the parties present and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as other material brought on record, we are not inclined to quash the impugned F.I.R.
However, in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, we dispose of this writ petition with the following conditions:-
1. The investigation of the aforesaid case shall go on but the petitioner no. 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, shall not be arrested till the submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., subject to their extending full cooperation during investigation.
2. Qua petitioner no. 1, Nishant, this writ petition stands dismissed. However, considering the nature of the allegations made in the F.I.R. and submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners, it is directed that in case he appears before the court concerned within thirty days from today and applies for bail, the same shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously by the courts below in view of the settled law laid by the Seven Judges' decision of this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2005 Cr.L.J. 755 as well as judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Order Date :- 5.9.2018 Rahul.