Court No. - 43
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5316 of 2019 Petitioner :- Ram Shanker And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sunil Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J. Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.
Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned AGA and perused the impugned F.I.R, as well as material brought on record.
The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R, dated 16.11.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 0402 of 2018, under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, P.S. Aliganj, District Etah.
Matter relates to execution of a sale deed on the basis of forged Adhar biometrics by one co-accused Tinku Khan, who manipulated the Adhar biometrics of his sibling, who was reported to be no more, as he was missing for the last 10 years, and the contention of the petitioners that they were not aware as to the identity of the vendor (Rinku Khan) cannot be accepted, as the petitioners were marginal witnesses to the deed in question, cognizable offences are disclosed.
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 the 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.
Order Date :- 26.2.2019 N.S.Rathour