Full Bench dismissed Criminal Misc. Writ Petition seeking quashing of an FIR. Court held prima facie cognizable offences were made out based on FIR allegations, precluding interference with investigation.
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. - 43
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 2759 of 2019
Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar And 7 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kalp Dev Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J. Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.
Heard Sri Kalp Dev Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned AGA and perused the impugned F.I.R, as well as material brought on record.
The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R, dated 11.1.2019 registered as Case Crime No. 0029 of 2019, under sections 147,323,504,506,452,427 IPC P.S. Handiya District Prayagraj.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that F.I.R is malafidely motivated, as its' an outcome of local village election rivalry, coupled with the fact that one of the co-accused Banwari Lal is reported to have died 15 years ago, no offences are made out, F.I.R, be quashed.
Learned A.G.A, has rightly opposed the submissions on the ground that F.I.R nominates lathi/danda,knife injuries having been caused by the petitioners at the wife of the informant, the two daughters, coupled with serious injuries, including loot of house hold items yet it is nowhere alleged that its' a case of no injury, cognizable offences are made out, writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
The Full Bench of this Court in Ajit Singh @ Muraha v. State of U.P. (2006 (56) ACC 433) reiterated the view taken by the earlier Full Bench in Satya Pal v. State of U.P. (2000 Cr.L.J. 569) after considering the various decisions including State of Haryana v. 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 F.I.R. 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 F.I.R or staying the arrest of the petitioners.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 5.2.2019 RS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the F.I.R. discloses presence of cognizable offence warranting quashing?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Rakesh Kumar And 7 Others
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Pankaj Naqvi
Umesh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
