Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 20260 of 2018 Petitioner :- Rajat Kumar And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sushmita Raghav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ajay Dubey
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Ravindra Nath Kakkar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Ajay Dubey, learned counsel for opposite party no.4.
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 10.07.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 621 of 2018, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 376, 377, 498-A IPC and section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Khatauli, District Muzaffar Nagar.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the impugned FIR has been lodged by the respondent no. 4 wife of petitioner no. 1 containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against her mother-in-law, Devar and Nandoi, petitioner nos. 2 to 4 alleging commission of offences by them under Sections 323, 504, 506, 376, 377, 498-A IPC and section 3/4 D.P. Act. It is further submitted that the allegation regarding commission of offence under section 377 IPC is against the petitioner No. 1 husband and of offence under section 376 IPC is against petitioner no. 2 Ankit Kumar, devar. Next argued that the statement of the prosecutrix under section 164 Cr.P.C. has not been recorded till date and apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned FIR no credible evidence whatsoever is coming forth even prima facie indicating at the petitioners complicity in the commission of the alleged crime and for the aforesaid reason the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed.
Per contra learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant submitted that from the perusal of the impugned FIR and on the basis of the allegation made therein, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is disclosed against the petitioners.
After having heard learned counsel for the parties present and perused the impugned FIR, we are not inclined to quash the same.
However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we direct that investigation of the aforesaid case shall go on but the petitioners no. 3 and 4 shall not be arrested till the submission of police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. subject to their extending full co-operation during investigation. So far as petitioner no. 1 and 2 are concerned, it is directed that in case they appear before the court concerned within thirty days from today and apply for bail, the same shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously, if possible, on the same day by the courts below in view of the settled law laid by the Seven Judges' decision of this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2005 Cr. L. J. 755 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
With the aforesaid direction, this petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 27.7.2018/RPD