Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 2639 of 2021
Petitioner :- Sanjeev And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashish Goyal Counsel for Respondent :- G.A
Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker,J. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Ashish Goyal, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri J.K. Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents and perused the material on record.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners Sanjeev, Mamta, Sandeep, Smt. Rinky and Kuldeep seeking quashment of FIR dated 15.1.2021 registered as Case Crime No. 47 of 2021 for the offence under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 376, 511 of I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act and 3(2)(va), 3(1)dha S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Police Station Hapur Nagar, District Hapur with further prayer to stay the arrest of the petitioners.
Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the F.I.R. has been lodged with malafide intentions levelling general and omnibus allegations against the husband and other family members of the husband. It is argued that the allegations are totally false and incorrect. It is further argued that the allegation of attempting to commit rape is also a false allegation and no such incident ever took place. It is argued that the petitioner no.2 is a practising advocate at Delhi. It is further argued that the respondent no. 3 is a very advance lady and she was creating pressure on the petitioner no. 1 for breaking relationship with his other family members and reside with her in her parental house which was refused by him which resulted in the lodging of the impugned F.I.R. It is argued that the F.I.R. has been lodged on the basis of concocted story and with legal advise. It is argued that as such the impugned F.I.R. be quashed.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for quashing of the F.I.R. and argued that there are serious allegations levelled against the accused persons in the F.I.R. It is argued that the allegations as levelled do make out cognizable offence and investigation is needed in so far as the allegations and their nature are concerned. It is further argued that there have been serious allegations against the petitioner no. 3 of attempting to commit rape upon the respondent no. 3 and molesting her. It is argued that since there are serious allegations it cannot be said that the present F.I.R. is false and has a concocted version and deserves to be quashed. It is argued that the writ petition is devoid of any merit and be dismissed.
Perusal of the impugned FIR and material on record makes out a prima facie case against the petitioners. The submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners relate to disputed questions of facts, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in jurisdiction of under Article 226 of Constitution of India.
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 petitioner.
Accordingly, this writ petition fails and is dismissed.
The party shall file computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioner (s) along with a self attested identity proof of the said person (s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 6.4.2021/Naresh