Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 37985 of 2018 Petitioner :- Ram Prakash Yadav And 5 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ravindra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Manoj Kumar
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri N.K. Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State, perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
This petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to quash the impugned FIR dated 27.11.2018 arising out of Case Crime No.451 of 2018 under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 352, 452, 427, 324, 307 I.P.C., P.S. Mohammadabad, District Mau.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that earlier also an FIR was lodged against the petitioners by the private respondent in a case which was of no injury though it is a case of injury but the injuries sustained by the victim are simple in nature.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for quashing of the F.I.R. which discloses cognizable offence and submits that several injuries have sustained by the victims including lacerated wound on the forehead.
The Full Bench of this Court in Ajit Singh @ Muraha v. State of U.P. (2006 (56) ACC 433) reiterated the view taken by the earlier Full Bench in Satya Pal v. State of U.P. (2000 Cr.L.J. 569) after considering the various decisions including State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (AIR 1992 SC 604) that there can be no interference with the investigation or order staying arrest unless cognizable offence is not ex-facie discernible from the allegations contained in the F.I.R. or there is any statutory restriction operating on the power of the Police to investigate a case.
From perusal of the FIR, prima facie, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out. Hence, no ground exists for quashing of the F.I.R. or staying the arrest of the petitioners.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Raj Beer Singh, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 21.12.2018 Madhurima