Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 25721 of 2018 Petitioner :- Robin And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyam Narayan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Ravindra Nath Kakkar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 29.3.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 235 of 2018, under Sections 498A, 323, 324, 307, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Shamli, District Shamli.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged by the respondent no. 3 who is the father of the victim, Swati, wife of petitioner no. 1, Robin roping in the entire family of his son-in-law including his father, mother, cousin father and married sister. He next submitted that the petitioner nos. 4 and 5 by no stretch of imagination can be said to be the beneficiaries of the dowry allegedly demanded by petitioner nos. 1 to 3 from the daughter of the respondent no. 3 or connected with her alleged torture and maltreatment by them in her matrimonial home. He further submitted that apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned F.I.R., no credible evidence whatsoever is forthcoming even prima facie indicating at the petitioners' complicity and hence the impugned F.I.R. qua petitioner nos. 4 to 5 is liable to be quashed.
Per contra learned A.G.A. submitted that from the perusal of the impugned F.I.R. and on the basis of the allegation made therein, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is disclosed against the petitioners.
After having heard learned counsel for the parties present and perused the impugned F.I.R., we are not inclined to quash the same.
However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we direct that investigation of the aforesaid case shall go on but the petitioner nos. 4 to 5 shall not be arrested till the submission of police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. subject to their extending full co-operation during investigation.
As far as petitioner nos. 1 to 3 are concerned, who is the husband, father- in-law (sasur) and mother-in-law (saas) of the daughter of the respondent no. 3, the petition stands dismissed. However, it is directed that in case they appear before the court concerned within thirty days from today and apply for bail, the same shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously by the courts below in view of the settled law laid down by the Seven Judges' decision of this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2005 Cr.L.J. 755 which has been affirmed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) With the aforesaid directions, this petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 17.9.2018 SA