Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 22655 of 2018
Petitioner :- Prasanjeet
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Avinash Pandey,Sri Kamal Krishna(Sr. Adv.)
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Kamal Krishna, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Avinash Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Deepak Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State are present.
The present writ petition has been filed with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. dated 22.7.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 698 of 2018, under Section 304, 308, 337, 338, 427, 228, 34 IPC, P.S. Masuri, District Ghaziabad. On 20.8.2018, the following order was passed:-
"Heard Sri Kamal Krishna, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Avinash Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Deepak Mishra, learned AGA for the State.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the occurrence has taken place on Khasra No. 173-M which is recorded in the name of M/s. B.S.A. Buildcon Private Ltd. and it is stated that petitioner's plot is adjacent to the said plot and he is not even remotely connected with the plot on which construction of the building operation was going on. He has also annexed the copy of the sale deed dated 30.04.2014.
Learned AGA shall verify the aforesaid facts. Put up on 24.08.2018.
Office is directed to furnish a copy of this order to learned AGA for the State."
Learned A.G.A. states that petitioner is the share holder of Khasra No. 173, where the incident has taken place. It is stated that it is a green belt area and there is no Khasra No. 173-M.
The Full Bench of this Court in Ajit Singh @ Muraha v. State of U.P. (2006 (56) ACC 433) reiterated the view taken by the earlier Full Bench in Satya Pal v. State of U.P. (2000 Cr.L.J. 569) after considering the various decisions including State of Haryana v. 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 F.I.R. 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 F.I.R. or staying the arrest of the petitioners.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
Order Date :- 24.8.2018
A.P. Pandey