Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 23091 of 2018
Petitioner :- Yashwant Yadav And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Satya Prakash Singh 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 petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. in case crime no. 259 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 304 B I.P.C. & 3 /4 D. P. Act registered at P.S.- Sarai Lakhansi, District- Mau.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners are the nephew of co-accused Ramayan Yadav (husband of the deceased) living separately from him and his wife for the last 10 years having no concern either with her alleged maltreatment in her matrimonial home or with the alleged demand for dowry or her murder for non-fulfillment of additional dowry. It is next submitted that they can neither said to be the beneficiaries of additional dowry demanded from the deceased and her parents by her husband. He next submitted that apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned F.I.R., no credible evidence whatsoever is forthcoming even prima facie indicating at the petitioners' complicity and hence the impugned FIR qua petitioners 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. As far as the question of lack of evidence in support of the allegation made in the impugned FIR is concerned the same shall be collected during investigation and the impugned FIR is not liable to be quashed on the basis of the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners.
From the perusal of the impugned F.I.R. it appears that on the basis of the allegations made therein a prima facie cognizable offence is made out. There is no ground for interference in the F.I.R. Therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned F.I.R. is refused.
However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that petitioner are the nephew of the husband of the deceased, it is directed that in case the petitioners appear before the court concerned within 30 days from today and apply for bail, the same shall be heard and disposed of by the courts below in view of the case of Smt. Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. 2005 Cr.L.J. 755 and Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Versus State of U.P. which has been approved by the Hon'ble Apex Court in reported in 2009(4) S.C.C. 437.
With this direction, this petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 24.8.2018 AKT