Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar, Singh,J.
Heard Sri Kunwar Mridul Rakesh, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Vaibhav Kalia, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A.for the State of U.P.and Sri V.K.Sahi, learned counsel for respondent no.4, Smt. Rita Dixit.
This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioners Raja Bux Singh and Raju Verma with the following prayers :
(I)to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned FIR of case crime No. 1521 of 2014 under sections 364/364-A I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali City, District Hardoi contained in Annexure-1 and every proceedings arising out of the same.
(II) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the opposite parties not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance of the impugned FIR contained in Annexure-1.
(III)to issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, just and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case.
The facts, in brief, of this case are that the impugned FIR has been lodged by respondent no. 4 Smt. Rita Dixit on 21.8.2014 at 11.00 A.M.in respect of the incident allegedly occurred on 3.8.2014 at about 9.30 P.M.and thereafter, at police station Kotwali Shahar, district Hardoi in case crime No. 1521 of 2014 under sections 364, 364A I.P.C. against the petitioners and 3 unknown miscreants alleging therein that the first informant, Smt. Rita Dixit, respondent No. 4, wife of the victim Dinesh Dixit is resident of House No. 45 Nehata Hardoi, on 3.8.2014 at about 5.00 P.M.the petitioner Raja Bux Singh, who was doing contractor ship along with the informant's husband came to her house in a Safari Car No. UP 32 EF 7924, driven by the petitioner Raju along with 3 unknown persons and they put the proposal before the informant's husband for going to Haridwar to have a dip in the Ganga River on the last Monday of Shrawan, on which it was told by the first informant to her husband that there had been a dispute with the petitioner Raja Bux Singh in the year 2007 over a contractor ship,the same was settled so that the dispute may not increase and the amount of Rs. 25 lakhs was given to the petitioner Raja Bux Singh for the work of contractor ship, therefore, she was not permitting her husband to go alone in the company of the petitioner Raja Bux Singh to Haridwar due to his criminal image and rogue. On this advice, the informant's husband also avoided the aforesaid proposal by saying that at some other occasion he would go accompanying with family but the petitioner Raja Bux Singh assured the informant's husband and the first informant by saying that he was ready to move to Haridwar today accompanying her along with wife and children and by saying that be ready to move, he was bringing his family and he left to his house, after about one hour, the petitioner Raja Bux Singh along with his wife and daughter came there by the same vehicle and insisted to go to Haridwar, relying upon the petitioner Raja Bux Singh, informant's husband , first informant and her children became ready to go to Haridwar and they moved to Haridwar at 9.30 P.M.by their vehicle No. UP 30-X 2728 by following the vehicle of petitioner Raja Bux Singh. In the morning of 4.8.2014 at about 4.00 A.M.they reached to Haridwar where the petitioner Raja Bux Singh asked to stay at Alakh Nanda Guest House and the vehicles were stopped there, the aforesaid guest house was at a distance of 7-8 kms.from the city of Haridwar in a deserted place that is why the first informant refused to stay there but after exchange of a lot of words at about 6.00 A.M. Rooms were booked by the petitioner Raja Bux Singh in Trishul Hotel, near Hari Ki Paddi and called his acquaintances from Haridwar and the informant's husband was introduced to them by the petitioner Raja Bux Singh by name saying that he was Dinesh Dixit, who was doing the contractor ship in Hardoi, thereafter, the petitioner Raja Bux Singh brought the first informant and her children, his wife and daughter to Ganga River and after having bath she was brought to Hotel where she was stayed, thereafter, the petitioner Raja Bux Singh along with driver Raju and the persons of his acquaintance had taken away to the informant's husband at the pretext to have a bath in Ganga River, when they did not return back, the children of first informant went to the Bank of Ganga River (Ghat) in their search but nobody was found there, who on coming back apprised the first informant about the non presence of the informant's husband at the bank of river, then the first informant became too much worried but she was told by wife of the petitioner Raja Bux Singh not to worry because her husband often used to come here and was having acquaintance with many persons, the informant's husband would not be missing , thereafter, after expiry of about one hour the petitioner Raja Bux Singh came alone to the Hotel and uttered that her husband drowned into the Ganga river due to heavy flow of water. On this information, the first informant and her children became too much sad and started weeping, then the petitioner Raja Bux Singh took her eldest but minor son Rahul in his company for lodging its information at the police outpost, on their return back, the first informant insisted the petitioner Raja Bux Singh to bring her to the place where her husband was drowned. The first informant and her children came to Hari Ki Paddi where the informant's husband had come to have the bath and enquired from the persons and Pandas who were present there, they all denied the fact that any of the person was drowned there, thereafter the first informant gave the information to her family members through her Cellular Phone but before arrival of her family members, the petitioner Raja Bux Singh , driver Raju and 4 or 5 persons having acquaintance with the petitioner Raja Bux Singh brought the informant to S.P.City and application was given to him through her, on which it was told by the S.P.City that on recovery of the dead body, the information would be provided. In the night of 5.8.2014,the family member of the first informant came to Haridwar but the petitioner Raja Bux Singh brought the informant and her family members to Hardoi on the pretext that on receiving the information from the police about the recovery of the dead body, they would again come back. The first informant narrated the whole story to her family members at Hardoi then her family members made a contact with the petitioner Raja Bux Singh and developed a pressure to disclose the true fact then the petitioners extended the threat not to take any legal action in this regard otherwise whole of the family would meet with the same fate as of Dinesh Dixit happened , due to fear of the petitioners, the first informant could not initiate any action but came to Haridwar twice or thrice to enquire about her husband but his whereabouts could not be known then the first informant became confident that the petitioners and their associates either abducted and illegally detained her husband or he has been killed so that the amount of Rs. 25 Lakhs given by her husband to the petitioner Raja Bux Singh could not be returned and the petitioner Raja Bux Singh would be able to get the contractor-ship easily in absence of her husband. The husband of the first informant and her family members were taken to Haridwar in furtherance of a conspiracy to get her husband abducted, the threat of life in case any legal action is taken has also been extended, the FIR was lodged by the first informant for taking the legal action in this regard and to recover the first informant's husband.
The prayer for quashing the impugned FIR has been made on the following grounds :
i.That the impugned FIR has been registered on the basis of false and imaginary allegations levelled in by the opposite party no. 4 Smt. Rita Dixit.
ii.That the opposing party number four acting under the dictates, influence of the political higher ups having much influence in the ruling government have got a false FIR registered against the petitioners in order to achieve political gains by tarnishing and spoiling the repute of the petitioners amongst the public.
iii.That the police of P.S. Kotwali City district Hardoi has no jurisdiction to investigate the present alleged incident as the incident in question as per the prosecution itself has taken pace at Har Ki Padddi ghat district and city Hardwar.
iv.That the allegations levelled, story narrated in the impugned first information report is patently false, absurd and has been cooked up with malafide intentions in order to harass the petitioners.
v.That the impugned first information report has been lodged after and an unexpected delay of about 18 days from the date of incident.
vi.That the son of the victim and informant had informed the police of Chauki Har-Ki- Paddi about the accident in question whereby shri Dinesh Dixit (victim) got drowned in the River Ganges while taking his holy bath, the said information was registered by the police chauki Har-Ki-paddi Haridwar at general diary number 16 at 9:15 A.M. on 4.8.2014.
vii.That there is no motive upon the petitioners of having committed the alleged incident.
viii.That there was no animosity between the petitioners as well as the victim Shri Dinesh Dixit, both were good friends and used to travel together along with their families quite often to various religious places.
ix.That the petitioner no. 2 Raju was not even present at the place of incident while the families were taking holy bath at Har-Ki- Paddi Ghat in Haridwar.
x.That registration of the impugned FIR is clear violation of the fundamental rights of the petitioners enshrined under article 14 of the constitution of India.
xi.That the impugned FIR registered as case crime no. 1521/2014 is based on imaginary, false and frivolous allegations and hence is liable to be quashed.
xii.According to the allegations made in the impugned FIR, the alleged incident had taken place at the Bank of Ganga River ( Har Ki Paddi) in Haridwar, its information too was registered at the police outpost Har Ki Paddi, district Uttarakhand on 4.8.2014 at 9.15 a.m. Vide G.D.No. 16 but in respect of the same incident, the FIR has been lodged at Kotwali Shahar district Hardoi, district U.P., on account of lack of jurisdiction the police of police station Kotwali City Hardoi is not competent to investigate the matter and to make the arrest of the petitioners.
xiii.The impugned FIR has been lodged by Opposite Party No.4 Smt. Rita Dixit against the petitioners, the same is false, fabricate based on imagination, the registration of the FIR against the petitioners is clearly a violation of fundamental rights of the petitioners as enumerated under Art. 14 of the Constitution of India.
xiv. The Opposite Party No. 4 in connivance with/on the behest of the influential former Cabinet Minister Shri Naresh Agarwal as well as son Shri Nitin Aggarwal, the State Minister in the U.P. Government, lodged the impugned FIR so that the petitioner may be sent behind the bars to tarnish their image and spoil their career for their vested political gain.
In reply of the above contention it is submitted by the learned A.G.A. and the counsel for O.P. No. 4 that on the basis of the allegations made in the impugned FIR a cognizable offence is made out and part of the incident has occurred in district Hardoi from where in a pre-planned manner the victim was taken to Haridwar from where he went missing ; at Haridwar the information of missing was given but no FIR at case crime number was registered. The part of the incident has occurred in district Hardoi as such there is no illegality in lodging the FIR at police station Kotwali city and conducting the investigation by the police of Kotwali city Hardoi. It is a well settled law that during investigation if the the I.O. finds that he was not having the territorial jurisdiction to investigate the case,the same would be transferred to the police station where the offence was committed . So far as the submission with regard to the malafide intention of first informant is concerned, there is no material in its support and there is no reason to show that the impugned FIR has been lodged by O.P. No. 4 in connivance with Sri Naresh Agarwal and Sri Nitin Agarwal even relationship or any affinity with O.P.No.4 could not be established by the petitioners and no enmity of the petitioners has been shown with the above mentioned Sri Naresh Agarwal and Sri Nitin Agarwal. The present writ petition is devoid of merits the same may be dismissed.
Considering the allegations made in the FIR, facts and circumstances of the case and the grounds taken by the petitioners it appears that the victim Sri Dinesh Chandra Dixit, husband of the first informant, was insisted and persuaded by the petitioners and taken from his home to Haridwar. The manner in which the victim was taken and was missing from Haridwar and the motive attributed to the petitioners for committing the alleged offence, require a proper investigation. At this stage, it is very difficult to record any finding that the victim was not taken by the petitioners to Haridwar in furtherance of a conspiracy or to give effect a pre planned scheme, the same is subject matter of investigation, therefore, it is very difficult to record a finding at this stage that ' part of cause of action' has not been arisen at district Hardoi, if such finding can not be recorded at this stage, the FIR may be lodged at Police Station Kotwali City Hardoi which empowers territorial jurisdiction to make investigation of above mentioned case, therefore, the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the police of Police station Kotwali City Hardoi is not having the territorial jurisdiction to register the case and investigate the same, has no substance and on this ground the FIR may not be quashed. The impugned FIR is having the detailed version of the incident whereas the information of missing was registered at the police outpost Har Ki Paddi, Haridwar. The lodging of impugned FIR may not be barred by G.D.entry No. 16 dated 4.8.2014 at 9.15 A.M. registered at police outpost Har Ki Paddi, it may not be said to be second FIR. The settled position of law is that the FIR of a cognizable offence may be registered at any police station, if during investigation the I.O.comes to the conclusion that he is not having territorial jurisdiction to investigate the same or at the time of lodging the FIR, the Officer in charge of Police Station finds that offence has been committed at another police station and the investigation is required by any another police station, the investigation may be transferred to that police station.
So far as the submission made by counsel for the petitioners that the impugned FIR has been lodged with mala fide intention at the behest of Former Cabinet Minister Sri Naresh Agrawal and his son Sri Nitin Agrawal, the State Minister of the Government of Uttar Pradesh, is also not having substance. It is a case in which according to the allegations made , the husband of the first informant was taken to Haridwar from his home situated in District Hardoi and since then was missing, as narrated here in above.
From the perusal of the impugned FIR, it reveals that the allegations made therein are, prima facie, disclosing the commission of the cognizable offence. There is no good ground to interfere in the impugned FIR, therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned FIR is refused.
There is no good ground to issue any direction to the police authorities not to arrest the petitioners, such prayer is also refused.
However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the petitioners appear before the court concerned within 30 days from today and apply for bail, the same shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously by the courts below.
With the above direction, this petition is finally disposed of.
Dated : 16.9.2014 Su