The Court found no grounds to quash an FIR under IPC Section 354(D), 504, 506 and POCSO Section 8 lodged against the petitioner. Consequently, the prayer for staying arrest was rejected, directing the petitioner to file for anticipatory bail before the competent authority.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 44
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 17302 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sajjan Giri Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Nand Lal Yadav,Prem Chandra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard Sri Prem Chandra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Rajiv Dwivedi, learned counsel for the private respondent, Sri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
This petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. dated 22.05.2019 registered as case crime no. 0085 of 2019 under sections 354(D), 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 8 of POCSO Act, police station Tindwari, District Banda.
On going through the FIR, we are satisfied that no case is made out to quash the same. The contents of the report discloses commission of noncompoundable offence that demands investigation. It would be also be appropriate to state that prima facie we are also not satisfied that it is necessary to meet the ends of justice to quash the FIR and further that the investigation required to be made shall be abuse of the process.
In light of whatever stated above, we are not inclined to quash the FIR.
The petitioner/s has also prayed for an interim order to stay the arrest during the course of investigation relating to the FIR that is sought to be quashed in this petition for writ. In our opinion, when we are not inclined to grant the main relief sought by the petitioner/s, it would not be appropriate to grant the ancillary relief. Beside that the petitioner/s is/are having an efficacious remedy by way of filing an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Uttar Pradesh Amendment) to have anticipatory bail apprehending arrest.
The petitioner/s may avail such remedy if so advised. As there appears to be an interim order passed in this petition by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 25.06.2019 staying arrest of the petitioner/s, the same shall remain continue till 15.08.2019, provided the petitioner/s move an application before the Court competent as per provisions of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Uttar Pradesh Amendment) on or before 10.08.2019.
The petition for writ is disposed of accordingly.
(Raj Beer Singh, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
Order Date :- 2.8.2019 Anand
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the FIR alleging offences under Sections 354(D), 504, 506 IPC and Section 8 POCSO Act should be quashed.
Whether an interim order staying the arrest should be maintained until filing an application for anticipatory bail.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Sajjan Giri
State Of U.P.
Ramesh Sinha
Raj Beer Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
