Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 25725 of 2018
Petitioner :- Shital Rajpoot
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Nitin Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Nitin Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri N.K.Verma, learned Brief Holder appearing for the State and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 7.6.2018, registered as case crime No.610 of 2018, under Sections 323, 406, 420, 504 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Farrukhabad, District Farrukhabad.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with malafide intention. He further submits that the petitioner has only introduced the respondent no.3 with the co-accused Sanjeev Rajpoot and the money transaction has been done between the respondent no.3 and co-accused, namely, Sanjeev Rajpoot, in whose account the money was transferred. He argued that the co-accused, namely, Sanjeev Rajpoot has already been arrested by the police and is confined in jail. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is absolutely false, frivolous and baseless. No offence is made out against the petitioner, hence, FIR is liable to be quashed by this Corut.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for quashing of the F.I.R. which discloses cognizable offence.
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 prayer for the same is hereby refused.
However, if the petitioner moves bail application before the court below, the court below while considering his bail application shall take into account the aforesaid fact as has been argued by learned counsel for the petitioner.
The application stands disposed of.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
Order Date :- 17.9.2018 NS