Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.
Heard Shri Akhilesh Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Arun Kumar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record. However, no-one is present on behalf of caveator.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner- Rajesh Kumar Yadav with a prayer to issue a writ in the nature of certioari to quash the impugned FIR dated 11.07.2021 bearing FIR No.0162 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 307, 332, 353, 336, 427, 171-F, 34, 188, 269 I.P.C. & Section 7 of Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1932 & Section 51 of Disaster Management Act, 2005 and Sections 131, 132(3), 135-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, 1951, 1989 & Section 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 & Section 3(1) of The Epidemic Diseases (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020, Police Station Aaspur Devsara, District Pratapgarh with a further prayer not to arrest the petitioner in pursuance of the impugned F.I.R.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned FIR has been lodged against large number of persons, around 161 persons by name and 200-250 unknown persons with the allegation that many persons in the mob were armed with fire arm weapons and they had fired upon the police authorities, although no one had received any kind of injuries, as is apparent from the impugned FIR. He further argued that the impugned FIR is politically motivated as it is not possible for a person/police to name all 161 persons by name, father name and correct address in the FIR. He next argued that the petitioner was not present on the date and time of the alleged incident and he was remain present in his village Sonpura along with Lekhpal in order to measurement of some land. In support of his argument he placed reliance upon some photographs which are annexed as Annexure 2 to the petition. He next argued that the petitioner is husband of the Pradhan of village and due to political rivalry he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He next argued that the impugned FIR has been lodged against the petitioner just for harassment with oblique motive. The entire allegations levelled against the petitioner are absolutely false, frivolous and baseless, hence, the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed.
Learned A.G.A., on the other hand, opposed the prayer for quashing of the F.I.R. and submitted that from a perusal of FIR cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner as he is named in the impugned FIR along with the other co-accused persons and they attacked on the police authorities. He further submitted that no doubt the police personnel did not receive any fire arm injury, but 16 of them have received injuries of other weapons with which other accused were armed with. It is also evident from the impugned FIR that vehicles were damaged and public property were also put to loss. He next argued that the plea of alibi cannot be examined by this Court in a writ petition as the same can be adjudged during the course of trial on the basis of the evidence adduced by the petitioner. He further argued that co-accused Shubham Yadav had also challenged the impugned FIR by way of filing Writ Petition No.14752 (M/B) of 2021, which was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 15.07.2021, therefore, the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
Having examined the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, perusing the impugned F.I.R., which clearly shows that cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner, we are of the opinion that it cannot be said that the petitioner was not involved in the present case and the ground taken by learned counsel for the petitioner that no injury was sustained by any police personnel or the informant of fire arm weapon cannot be a good ground to quash the impugned FIR as 16 police personnel have received injuries of other weapons with which other accused were armed with and as also in the alleged incident much damage was caused to public property, hence, no interference is called for by this Court in its extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the F.I.R. or for grant of any interim relief to the petitioner.
The petition lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Saroj Yadav, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 19.8.2021 Anand/-