Dismissed

Tejas Verma @ Tejas @ Banti v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC4 Mar 2020CRLP/3856/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Criminal Misc. Writ Petition sought quashing of an FIR registered under sections 452, 354, 354-D IPC and POCSO Act alleging child molestation. The court held that as a cognizable offence was discernible from the FIR, no ground existed for quashing or staying arrest, and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed. Direction to consider bail within 30 days if petitioner appears or surrenders.

Tejas Verma @ Tejas @ Banti Vs State of U.P. and… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 3856 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Tejas Verma @ Tejas @ Banti Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Syed Wajid Ali,Santosh Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J. Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

Heard Syed Wajid Ali and Sri Santosh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking quashing of the FIR dated 13.02.2020 registered as Case Crime No. 0058 of 2020, under Sections 452, 354, 354-D, 506 IPC and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Cantt., District Bareilly with a further prayer not to arrest the petitioner in pursuance of the first information report.

¶7

The allegation in the impugned F.I.R. lodged by the respondent no.4, is that on 09.02.2020 at about 12.30 pm. the petitioner entered into the house of the complainant and caught hold of her minor daughter Kavita Singh, aged about 16 years, and touched her inappropriately and misbehaved with her and when the informant raised a hue and cry her nephew Anil and brotherin-law, Updesh came there and tried to catch hold of the petitioner but he ran away threatening to kill them.

¶8

The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the impugned first information report has been lodged by way of counter blast since he himself has been assaulted by the said Anil and others on 09.02.2020 at about 11.30 am. and that he had been taken away by these persons in a Bolero Car and beaten up and he has lodged his first information report on 9th February, 2020 itself. He further submitted that apart from bald allegations made in the impugned FIR no evidence is forthcoming even prima facie indicating the complicity of the petitioner in the commission of the alleged crime and hence the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed.

¶9

Per contra learned A.G.A contended that the allegations made in the first information report cannot be aborted at this stage. The petitioner will have sufficient opportunity to rebut the allegations.

¶10

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.

¶11

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.

¶12

The writ petition is accordingly dismissed .

¶13

However, it is provided that if the petitioner appears or surrenders before the Court concerned within thirty days from today and applies for bail in the aforesaid case, his prayer for bail shall be considered by the court below expeditiously, in accordance with law.

¶14

Order Date :- 4.3.2020 N Tiwari

Tejas Verma @ Tejas @ Banti v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tejas Verma @ Tejas @ Banti v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Atul Pandey and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Khushi Pandey and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dheeraj Kumar and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Jhinku Prasad Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rajiv Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ghanshyam Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others