Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 25741 of 2019 Petitioner :- Suhail @ Border And 5 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rama Shanker Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J. Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
The petitioners who are six in number are seeking quashing of the F.I.R. dated 07.11.2019 registered as Case Crime No. 794 of 2019, under Section 420 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 352, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Shahjahanpur with a further prayer not to arrest him in pursuance of the said first information report.
As per the F.I.R version, the allegation is that the accused persons who are 20 in number have fraudulently got executed a sale deed in respect of Gata no. 905, 907 and 1167 which belonged to the father of the informant.
The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the father of the informant had two wives, namely, Smt. Ansari Begum and Smt. Anisha Begum and the informant is the daughter of second wife. It is further submitted that the father of the informant executed a power of attorney in favour of Smt. Ansari Begum and against this power of attorney a suit was filed which was dismissed. Smt. Ansari Begum has sold some property to the other co-accused, therefore, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners have no concern in respect of the alleged power of attorney or alleged sale deed as they are neither vendee or vendor nor they are witnesses of the sale deed or power of attorney and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. Hence, the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.
Per contra learned A.G.A. contended that the allegations made in the first information report cannot be aborted at this stage. The petitioner will have sufficient opportunity to rebut the allegations.
From perusal of the F.I.R., prima facie cognizable offences is made out at this stage against the petitioner, therefore, we do not find any cogent reason to quash the first information report. The prayer for quashing the first information report is refused.
However, in the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioners, it is directed that the petitioners shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case till the submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., subject to the restraint that he shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear as and when called upon to assist in the investigation.
With the above direction, this petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 18.12.2019 Kirti