Court No. - 46
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 17266 of 2019 Petitioner :- Ranvijay Singh And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohit Gautam,Rajesh Kumar Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J. Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
By means of the present writ petition, the petitioners have invoked extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the FIR dated 1.4.2019 registered as Case Crime No. 0118 of 2019, under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and anti Social Activities Prevention Act, 1986, P.S. Hathras Gate, District Hathras.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are being unnecessarily harassed on the basis of false allegations made against them. On the basis of a solitary case, the petitioners have been implicated in the present case. The petitioners have already been enlarged on bail by the court below under Section 3/4 of Gambling Act. Neither the petitioners are leaders nor members of any gang while prima facie no cognizable offence is made out pursuant to the FIR lodged by the respondent no.3. Hence the FIR deserves to be quashed.
Per contra the learned A.G.A. contended that the allegations contained in the first information report may not be nipped in the bud. There are sufficient material showing the complicity of the petitioner, who is associated with other accused persons in committing the offence. The innocence of the petitioner cannot be adjudged at this stage.
From the perusal of the first information report, it appears that on the basis of the allegations made therein, prima facie cognizable offence is made out. The petitioner has miserably failed to put forth any justifiable rationale for quashing the first information report. In the decision of Kishan Pal @ K.P. vs. State of U.P. and another, 2006 (54) ACC 1015, it has been held that it would not be proper in such matters for High Court to interfere in discretionary writ jurisdiction as the petitioner can always appear before the court concerned and make submission there. There is no ground for interference with the first information report. Therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned first information report is refused. The writ petition sans any merit and is accordingly dismissed.
However, considering the nature of the allegations made in the first information report and submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, it is directed that in case the petitioner appears before the court concerned within thirty days from today and applies for bail, the same shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously by the courts below in accordance with the provision of the Gangsters Act.
Order Date :- 25.6.2019 sfa/