Court No. - 46
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 24308 of 2019 Petitioner :- Surjeet @ Surjeet Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pankaj Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J. Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer to quash the F.I.R. dated 15.9.2019 registered in Case Crime No. 388 of 2019, under Section 364-A I.P.C., P.S. Sadar Bazar, district Mathura.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned first information report has been lodged by the respondent no. 3 against the petitioner with the allegations that the petitioner has kidnapped the son of the respondent no.3 and has made a ransom of Rs. 5 lacs and has also extended threat to life in case the demand is not fulfilled by him. He further submitted that apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned first information report no evidence is forthcoming even prima facie indicating at the complicity of the petitioner in the commission of the alleged crime and hence the impugned first information report is liable to be quashed.
Per contra the learned A.G.A. contended that the allegations contained in the first information report cannot be nipped in the bud. There are sufficient material showing the complicity of the petitioner. The innocence of the petitioner cannot be adjudged at this stage, hence the petitioner does not deserve any indulgence.
The Full Bench of this Court in Ajit Singh @ Muraha Vs. State of U.P., 2006 (56) ACC 433 reiterated the view taken by the earlier Full Bench in Satya Pal Vs. State of U.P., 2000 Cr.L.J. 569, after considering the various decisions including State of Haryana Vs. 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 FIR 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 FIR or staying the arrest of the petitioner.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
However, it is provided that if the petitioner appears or surrenders before the Court concerned within four weeks from today and applies for bail in the aforesaid case, his prayer for bail shall be considered by the courts below expeditiously, in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 28.11.2019 Shahnawaz