Court No. - 46
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 25534 of 2019 Petitioner :- Phool Chandra Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amar Singh Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J. Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
The petitioner has invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the FIR registered at Case Crime No. 362 of 2019, under Section 366, 120-B IPC, police station Sarpataha, district Jaunpur.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the FIR no allegation has been made against the petitioner in respect of abduction of the victim. The victim has moved an application dated 08.12.2019 before the District Magistrate, Jaunpur indicating therein that no one has abducted her and she herself had gone to her friend's house. As such the petitioner is being unnecessarily harassed at the behest of the respondent No. 4.
Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate contended that respondent No. 4 has specifically mentioned in the FIR that the victim was abducted by Anurag Yadav at the instigation of the petitioner, who is his uncle. Learned A.G.A. further submits that he has been informed by the investigating officer of the case that the statements of the victim under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. have been recorded on 17.12.2019 in which she has stated that she is residing in her parental house.
The Full Bench of this Court in Ajit Singh @ Muraha Vs. State of U.P., 2006 (56)ACC 433 reiterated the view taken by the earlier Full Bench in Satya Pal Vs. State of U.P., 2000 Cr.L.J. 569, after considering the various decisions including State of Haryana Vs. 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 FIR 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 FIR or staying the arrest of the petitioner.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
However, it is provided that if the petitioner appears or surrenders before the Court concerned within three weeks from today and applies for bail in the aforesaid case, his prayer for bail shall be considered by the courts below expeditiously, in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 18.12.2019 Ishrat