Haddish And Others vs State Of U.P. And Others
2011 Latest Caselaw 4930 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 44
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 19215 of 2011
 

 
Petitioner :- Haddish And Others
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others
 
Petitioner Counsel :- S.P. Pandey
 
Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Imtiyaz Murtaza,J.

Hon'ble Ashok Pal Singh,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Government Advocate.

This writ petition has been filed for quashing of an FIR in case crime No. 574 of 2011, under sections 417, 420, 423, 465, 467 and 474 IPC, police station Kotwali Bansi, District Siddharth Nagar.

The writ court is not competent to go into questions of facts and on the allegations, it cannot be said that no prima facie case is disclosed.

Hence, no ground exists for quashing the FIR or staying the arrest of the petitioners.

However, in the circumstances of the case, it is provided that if the petitioners move an application for surrender before the court concerned within three weeks from today, the Magistrate concerned shall fix a date about two weeks thereafter for the appearance of the petitioners and in the meantime release the petitioners on interim bail on such terms and conditions as the court concerned considers fit and proper till the date fixed for the disposal of the regular bail. The court concerned shall also direct the Public Prosecutor to seek instructions from the investigating officer by the date fixed and also give an opportunity of hearing to the informant and thereafter decide the regular bail application of the petitioners in accordance with the observations of the Full Bench of this Court in Amrawati and another Vs. State of UP, 2004 (57) ALR 290, affirmed by the Supreme Court in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of UP, 2009 (2) Crime 4 (SC) and reiterated by the Division Bench of this Court in Sheoraj Singh alias Chuttan Vs. State of UP and others, 2009 (65) ACC 781. If further instructions are needed or if adjournment of the case on the date fixed for hearing becomes unavoidable, the Court may fix another date, and may also extend the earlier order granting interim bail, if it deems fit.

It will also be in the discretion of the Sessions/Special Judge concerned to consider granting interim bail pending consideration of the regular bail on similar terms as mentioned herein above when and if the petitioners apply for bail before him.

In case the petitioners fail to appear before the court concerned on the dates fixed or they fail to cooperate with the investigating officer during interrogation, it will be open to the Public Prosecutor to move an application for cancelling the order of interim/final bail and the Court concerned may pass an appropriate order on merits.

With the aforesaid observations, this petition is disposed of.

Order Date :- 29.9.2011

Abhishek Sri.