Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 31256 of 2018 Petitioner :- Pradeep Kumar @ Bantoo Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Arvind Agrawal,Adya Shankar Chaturvedi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Krishna Pratap Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the State.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer to quash the F.I.R. dated 22.9.2018 registered as Case Crime No.523 of 2018, under Sections 60(2) and 63 of U.P. Excise Act and Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 104 of Trade Mark Act, 1999, P.S.- Kotwali Dehat, District- Etah.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is neither arrested on the spot nor any recovery has been made from him, but he has been nominated as an accused on the basis of the statements given by co-accused Arvind Yadav, Rajesh Yadav and Sonu, who were arrested on the spot. He further submitted that no evidence is forthcoming even prima facie indicating at the complicity of the petitioner in the commission of the alleged crime and hence the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.
From the perusal of the F.I.R., it appears that on the basis of the allegations made therein, prima facie cognizable offence is made out. There is no ground for interference with the F.I.R. Therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned F.I.R. is refused.
However, considering the nature of the allegations made in the F.I.R., the provisions of Section 157 Cr.P.C. and the view taken by the Apex Court in the case of Joginder Kumar Versus State of U.P.; 1994 Cr.L.J 1981, it is directed that the petitioner shall not be arrested in the abovementioned case, till the credible evidence is not collected by the Investigating Officer during investigation.
With the above directions, this petition is disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 31.10.2018 Shalini