Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 26472 of 2018 Petitioner :- Uma Shankar Dwivedi @ Madan Dubey And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Jainendra Kumar Mishra 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 08.05.2018 registered as Case Crime No.282 of 2018, under Sections 498A, 313, 324, 323 I.P.C., Police Station Ghatampur, District Kanpur Nagar.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the impugned FIR has been lodged by the respondent no.4 Ramesh Prasad Mishra father of Smt. Karuna Devi wife of Govind Dubey petitioner no.1 roping in the entire family of her husband including her father-in-law, jeth, mother-in-law and nanad, i.e. petitioner nos.1 and 3 to 5 alleging commission of offences by all the petitioners under Sections 498-A, 313, 324, 323 I.P.C. It is next contended that role of petitioner nos.1 and 3 to 5 is clearly distinguishable from that of the petitioner no.2. It is next contended that allegations made in the impugned F.I.R. are palpably false and the FIR has been lodged after 14 years of the marrige. Moreover, apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned FIR no credible evidence whatsoever is coming forth even prima facie indicating their complicity in the commission of the alleged crime and the impugned FIR qua the petitioners no. 1 and 3 to 5 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 and 3 to 5 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.2 Govind Dubey (husband) is concerned, the petition stands dismissed. However, it is directed that in case petitioner no.2 appears before the court concerned within two weeks from today and applies for bail, the same shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously by the courts below.
With the aforesaid directions, this petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 24.9.2018 Anand Sri./-