Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 30424 of 2018 Petitioner :- Siya Ram And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- K.K. Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Ravindra Nath Kakkar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned FIR dated 27.09.2017 registered as Case Crime No. 627 of 2017, under Sections 498A, 323, 326, 506 I.P.C. & Section 3/ 4 D. P. Act, P.S. Rasoolabad, District-Kanpur Dehat.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the impugned FIR has been lodged by the respondent no.3 Smt. Priyanka Devi wife of petitioner no.5 Vijay Singh @ Shyam roping in the entire family of her husband including his father petitioner no. 1, mother petitioner no. 2 and married sisters petitioner nos. 3 and 4 falsely alleging commission of offences by all the petitioners under Sections 498A, 323, 506 I.P.C. and 3 /4 D. P. Act. while specific allegations regarding commission of offence under Section 326 I.P.C. has been made by her against petitioner no. 5 Vijay Singh @ Shyam (husband). It is next contended that role of petitioner nos. 1 to 4 is clearly distinguishable from that of the petitioner no. 5 Vijay Singh @ Shyam (husband). Moreover, apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned F.I.R., no credible evidence whatsoever is forthcoming even prima facie indicating the complicity of petitioner nos. 1 to 4 and hence the impugned FIR qua petitioner nos. 1 to 4 is liable to be quashed.
Per contra learned A.G.A. submitted that from the perusal of the impugned FIR and on the basis of the allegation made therein, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is disclosed against the petitioners.
After having heard learned counsel for the parties present and perused the impugned FIR, we are not inclined to quash the same.
However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we direct that investigation of the aforesaid case shall go on but the petitioner nos. 1 to 4 shall not be arrested till the submission of police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. subject to their extending full co-operation during investigation.
As far as petitioner no. 5, Vijay Singh @ Shyam is concerned, who is the husband of Smt. Priyanka Devi the petition stands dismissed. However, it is directed that in case he appears before the court concerned within thirty days from today and applies for bail, the same shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously by the courts below in view of the settled law laid down by the Seven Judges' decision of this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2005 Cr.L.J. 755 which has been affirmed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) With the aforesaid directions, this petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 27.10.2018 AKT