Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 31213 of 2018 Petitioner :- Raja Singh Yadav And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Maithali Sharan Pipersenia Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Krishna Pratap Singh,J.
Certified copy of the impugned F.I.R. filed today in the Court is kept on record.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned FIR dated 25.10.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 411 of 2018, under Sections 342, 395, 387 and 323 I.P.C., P.S. Sipri Bazar, District Jhansi.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that from the perusal of the material brought on record including the enquiry report dated 4.10.2008 (Annexure-6), it transpires that there is a civil dispute between the parties and the impugned F.I.R. is the product of the same civil dispute. Moreover apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned FIR lodged by the the respondent no. 4 alleging commission of offences by the petitioners under Sections 342, 395, 387 and 323 I.P.C., no evidence is forthcoming, even prima facie indicating that any such incident, as alleged in the FIR, had ever taken place and hence the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed.
Per contra learned AGA submitted that the impugned FIR is not liable to be quashed on the basis of the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners for the reason that from the perusal of the impugned FIR and the allegations made therein it cannot be said that prima facie no cognizable offence is made out against the petitioners.
After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned FIR as well as the other material brought on record, we are not inclined to quash the impugned FIR.
However, considering the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners that in the present case litigation is still pending and some of the courts have decided the issue in favour of the petitioners, made in the impugned FIR, 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 petitioners shall not be arrested in above mentioned case, till the credible evidence is not collected by the I.O. during pendency of the investigation.
With the above direction this petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 31.10.2018 SA