Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5065 of 2018 Petitioner :- Rafi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Irshad Ahmad Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajesh Dayal Khare,J. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. dated 10.11.2017, which has been registered as Case Crime No. 0389 of 2017, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 332, 333, 353, 307, 336, 427, 504, 506, 34 IPC, and 3/4 Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act, 1984 and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932, Police Station Deedauli, District Jyotiba Phule Nagar/ Amroha.
It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated by the respondent no.2 due to village rivalry and present proceedings have been initiated only to built pressure upon the petitioner, which is bad in law.
It is next contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the co-accused Rizwan and six others have been granted interim relief from this Court on 19.12.2017 in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 28134 of 2017. The copy of the same has been filed as annexure no.2 to this writ petition.
He has further submitted that apart from the bald allegations made in the F.I.R., which is a bundle of lies and product of malice, no credible evidence is forthcoming, even prima facie, indicating that any such incident had taken place, hence the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. submitted that from the perusal of the impugned F.I.R., it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out, hence, the impugned F.I.R. is not 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, hence, there is no scope for interfering with the impugned F.I.R., therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned F.I.R. is refused.
However, considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and nature of allegations made in the F.I.R., it is directed that the petitioner shall not be arrested in the aforementioned case till submission of police report under Section 173(2) CrPC or till credible evidence is collected, whichever is earlier.
With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition is disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 27.2.2018 Nadim