Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7540 of 2018 Petitioner :- Shyama Charan Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Om Narayan Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajesh Dayal Khare,J. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
This writ petition has been filed with a prayer not to arrest the petitioner in pursuance of the impugned F.I.R. dated 03.03.2018, which has been registered as Case Crime No. 123 of 2018, under Sections 307, 504, 323, 506 IPC, Police Station Kant, District Shahjahanpur.
It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned FIR has been lodged by the respondent no.3 against the petitioner alleging therein that the petitioner alongwith Mahipal and Jaipal Singh came outside the door of the respondent no.3 and they abused and inimically assaulted by lathi, danda and knife. The respondent no.3 and his relative Surjeet Singh had received injury.
It is next contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that respondent no.3 Narveer Singh was medically examined and the Doctor found one injury on non-vital part on the ring finger of right hand. He has further submitted that from the perusal of the injury report, no case under Section 307 IPC is made out against the petitioner because the injury is simple in nature.
He has further submitted that apart from the bald allegations made in the F.I.R., which is a bundle of lies and product of malice, no credible evidence is forthcoming, even prima facie, indicating that any such incident had taken place, hence, the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has submitted that from the perusal of the impugned F.I.R., it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out, hence, the impugned F.I.R. is not liable to be quashed.
From the perusal of the F.I.R., it appears that on the basis of the allegations made therein prima facie cognizable offence is made out, hence, there is no scope for interfering with the impugned F.I.R. Therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned F.I.R. is refused.
However, considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and nature of allegations made in the F.I.R., it is directed that the petitioner shall not be arrested in the aforementioned case till submission of police report under Section 173(2) CrPC or till credible evidence is collected, whichever is earlier.
With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 28.3.2018 Nadim