Court No. - 40
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 34300 of 2018 Petitioner :- Ramraj Diwana And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shailesh Singh Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
This petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. in Case Crime No. 646 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 506 I.P.C, P.S. Bidhanu, District Kanpur Nagar.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged by the respondent no. 3 after an inordinate and unexplained delay of 2 years during the pendency of civil suit between the respondent no. 3 and the purchasers of the property, co-accused. Satyendra Kumar Chaudhary and Srikant Singh. Moreover apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned F.I.R. lodged by the the respondent no. 3 alleging commission of offences by the petitioners under the aforesaid sections, no evidence is forthcoming, even prima facie indicating at the petitioners' complicity and hence the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.
Per contra learned AGA submitted that the impugned F.I.R. 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 F.I.R. 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 F.I.R. as well as the other material brought on record, we are not inclined to quash the impugned F.I.R..
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 F.I.R., 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 :- 28.11.2018 SA