Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
Heard Sri Ravindra Nath Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned AGA for the State/respondents and perused the First Information Report and the material on record.
The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners, namely, Sanjay Kumar Sonkar, Jiya Lal Sonkar, Smt. Nirmala, Ajay Kumar Sonkar, seeking to quash the First Information Report registered as Case Crime No. 0148 of 2020, under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, police station Maheshganj, District Pratapgarh with a further prayer to stay the arrest during the pendency of the investigation of the said case.
It has been argued by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that marriage of the petitioner no.1-Sanjay Kumar Sonkar with the deceased Preeti Sonkar was solemnized in month of March, 2018. As the deceased was suffering from some ailment, her treatment was done by Homeopathic Doctor and lastly, she was shown to the homeopathic doctor on 19.06.2020 but ultimately she died on 20.06.2020. He also argued that the deceased was suffering from low blood pressure, Thyroid and Fever and as per post-mortem report, the deceased was died on account of Septicemia and viscera was preserved. He submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case without there being any cogent evidence against them, hence the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the First Information Report and argued that deceased died an unnatural death within seven years of marriage in her matrimonial home. He submits that from the perusal of the First Information Report, a cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner. Therefore, the present writ petition be dismissed.
The Full Bench of this Court in Ajit Singh @ Muraha Vs. State of U.P. and others : (2006) 56 ACC 433 reiterated the view taken by the earlier Full Bench in Satya Pal Vs. State of U.P. and others : 2000 Cr.L.J. 569 after considering the various decisions including State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal and others : 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.
Further the Apex Court in the case of State of Telangana v. Habib Abdullah Jellani : (2017) 2 SCC 779 has disapproved an order restraining the Investigating Agencies arresting the accused where prayer of quashing the First Information Report has been refused.
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.
Accordingly, this writ petition fails and is dismissed.
.
(Rajeev Singh, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 29.1.2021 Ajit/-