Court No. - 43
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 22143 of 2019 Petitioner :- Satish Rajbhar And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Suneel Kumar Rai Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J. Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
Heard Sri Suneel Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.G.A.
This writ petition has been filed, seeking a writ of mandamus, directing the respondent concerned, not to arrest the petitioner, with a further prayer for quashing the impugned FIR dated 31.5.2019, registered as Case Crime No.57/2019, under Sections 498-A/304-B/504/506/120-B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Tarwal, Azamgarh.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the married / unmarried sisters-in-law and brothers-in-law, they are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case, allegations levelled against them are absolutely false, frivolous and baseless, no offence is made out, FIR be quashed.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer and submits that offence is heinous in nature, cognizable offences are disclosed.
The Full Bench of this Court in Ajit Singh @ Muraha v. State of U.P. (2006 (56) ACC 433) reiterated the view taken by the earlier Full Bench in Satya Pal v. State of U.P. (2000 Cr.L.J. 569) after considering the various decisions including State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (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.
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.
The writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 30.9.2019 Chandra