Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.
Heard Shri Mohd. Salman, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri S.N. Tilhari, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State/respondents no.1 to 3 and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, Satish, seeking a writ of certiorari quashing the First Information Report dated 17.02.2021 registered as F.I.R. No. 0070 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Gosaiganj, District Lucknow.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent no.4/complainant purchased the land, bearing No.607, measuring 0.164 hectare through the petitoiner's contact in the month of January, 2020 by means of a sale deed and at the time of execution of sale deed, the respondent no.4/complainant has paid Rs.5,17,000/- to owner of the land in question/seller, namely, Chandra Shekhar Raidas but the respondent no.4 came to know in the month of January, 2021 that the land, which has been purchased by her, has already been sold by the father of Chandra Shekhar Raidas (Poorvi) by means of sale deed dated 23.04.2007. Thereafter, the complainant/respondent no.4 contacted the seller, namely, Chandra Shekhar Raidas, who told the complainant that the petitioner has known everything. Thereafter, the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged against the petitioner. He argued that the respondent no.4 has purchased the land in question from Chandra Shekhar Raidas and the petitioner has no concerned with the said purchase of the land in question and more so, the petitioner is not a witness in the sale deed nor beneficiary person nor received any amount of sale consideration. He argued that the allegations made in the impugned F.I.R. is false, hence the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.
Learned AGA, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer of the learned Counsel for the petitioner for quashing the impugned F.I.R. and has argued that it transpires from the impugned F.I.R. that there is specific allegations for cheating and forgery against the petitioner. He also argued that investigation of the case is going on and further from perusal of the impugned F.I.R., it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner, hence the instant writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
Keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in Neeharika Infrastructure Private Limited vs. State of Maharashtra (Criminal Appeal No. 330 of 2021, decided on 13.04.2021) and also considering the gravity of offence as alleged in the impugned F.I.R. and further the impugned F.I.R. discloses cognizable offence against the petitioner, we are of the opinion that no interference is called for by this Court in its extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the F.I.R. or for grant of any interim relief to the petitioner.
The petition lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 27.7.2021 Ajit/-