Allahabad High Court
Shailendra Kumar Gupta & 87 Others vs State Of U.P. & 3 Others on 21 November, 2016
Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Rekha Dixit
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 36
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 22268 of 2016
Petitioner :- Shailendra Kumar Gupta & 87 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Mathur,Sanjay Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Mrs. Rekha Dixit,J.
Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Mathur, Advocate assisted by Sri Sanjay Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Akhilesh Singh, Advocate assisted by Sri Vikash Sahai learned A. G.A for the State and perused the record.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the prayer to quash the F. I. R. Dated 12.10.2016 which has been registered as Case Crime No. 373 of 2016, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 332, 336, 353, 504, 427,295A I.P.C., and section 31(A) Criminal. Law Amendment Act and Section 2/3 Lok Sampati Kshati Niwaran Adhiniyam , Police Station Karari, District Allahabad.
On 21.10.2016 another Bench of this Court had passed the following order which is quoted below :-
" Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A.
This petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to quash the impugned FIR which has been registered as case crime no. 373 of 2016, under Sections-147, 148, 149, 307, 332, 336, 353, 504, 427, 295A IPC and Section-31 (A) of Criminal Law Amendment Act and Sections-2/3 of Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act, at P.S.-Karari, District-Kaushambi.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the impugned f. I. R. has been lodged by the respondent no. 4 who is a Sub-Inspector in U. P. Police against the petitioners who belong to a particular community falsely alleging commission of offences by them under Sections-147, 148, 149, 307, 332, 336, 353, 504, 427, 295A IPC and Section-31 (A) of Criminal Law Amendment Act and Sections-2/3 of Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act. In the impugned F. I. R. it has been alleged that occurrence which is the subject matter of the impugned F. I. R. was fall out of a clash which had taken place between the two rival communities during Durga Murti Visarjan at Rakswara trisection of village Katra and the members of the community, to which the petitioners belong, were trying to block the road, through which the members of the other community were going to take out Tazia procession and when the aforesaid information reached the police station, the members of the police force reached the place of incident and tried to pacify the petitioners but the petitioners who were armed with lathis and spades, did not stop and shouted slogans outraging the religious feelings of a particular community by insulting their religion and started pelting stones on the members of the police force, although, in the incident no-one had received injury. He next submitted that from the fact that the impugned F. I. R. has been lodged by the respondent no. 4 mentioning full particulars of 88 petitioners, complete with their parentage and full addresses, it is very much clear that the same was scribed in the police station after due deliberation and consultation and under political influence targeting the members of a particular community alone although the incident was an outcome of a mob frenzy in which the members of both the communities had clashed with each other. Hence the impugned F. I. R. which is a bundle of lies and product of malice, is liable to be quashed as under the circumstances of this case possibility of false implication of large number of innocent persons cannot be ruled out.
The submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners, prima facie appears to have force. The matter requires consideration.
Learned A. G. A. has accepted notice on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 4. He prays for and is allowed two weeks' time to file counter affidavit.
Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within one week thereafter.
List this matter on 16.11.2016 before appropriate Bench.
On that date, respondent No. 4 Sub-Inspector, Awanish Kumar Pathak shall appear in person before this Court.
Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be against the petitioners pursuant to the impugned FIR, which has been registered as case crime no. 373 of 2016, under Sections-147, 148, 149, 307, 332, 336, 353, 504, 427, 295A IPC and Section-31 (A) of Criminal Law Amendment Act and Sections-2/3 of Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act, at P.S.-Karari, District-Kaushambi.''
An affidavit of compliance has been filed by the Superintendent of Police, Kaushambi is taken on record.
From the perusal of the affidavit, it appears that two police constables have received injury in the said incident and photo copy of the same has been annexed as annexed at pages No. 17 and 18.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the impugned F.I.R has been lodged against named 122 accused persons and 400 unknown persons. The affidavit filed by the respondent No.4 is absurd on the face of it and it is highly improper and beyond imagination to think that the Station Officer who is the informant of the case was such vigilant police officer that he could identify each of the accused persons named in the F.I.R by their names, parentage and residential address and lodged the F.I.R against them. He pointed out that the medical examination report of the police personnel which has been annexed with the affidavit of compliance appears to be manipulated documents to justify the prosecution case against the petitioner and the injuries are simple in nature which can be easily manufactured.
The S.P. Kaushambi is present before this Court in person and he was also not able to justify the naming of the accused persons in such a large scale in the F.I.R which included parentage also and tried to submit his explanation for naming the petitioners.
In view of the interim order passed by this Court on 21.10.2016 staying the arrest of the petitioners and observation made therein requires that the matter be investigated by the responsible police officer not below the rank of Dy. S.P.
The S.P. Kaushambi has assured this Court that the investigation of the impugned F.I.R as well as two others F.I.R which has been lodged with respect to the same incident would be entrusted to the Additional S.P. Kaushambi and the appropriate police report would be submitted before the competent Court in accordance with law expeditiously.
Learned Government Advocate has also assured to this Court that the investigation of the case would be carried out in an impartial manner by the Additional S.P. Kaushambi as has been assured by the S.P. Kaushambi.
Taking into the account the said assurance made by the S.P. Kaushambi before this Court that the matter would be investigated in unbiased manner bringing the real culprit to book and no innocent person would be harassed who have been implicated in the present case. A large number of persons appears to have been implicated though only two constables have received simple injury which is superficial in nature. The investigation which is to be entrusted to the Additional S.P. by the S.P. Kaushambi shall be concluded within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order and shall report to the S.P. Kaushambi.
The S.P. Kaushambi shall monitor the investigation of the case by the Additional S.P. Kaushambi regularly fortnight till the same is concluded and submit a report to the same to the I.G. Allahabad, Division Allahabad, who shall also ensure that the investigation has been carried out in fair and unbiased manner.
Till the submission of the police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C the arrest of the petitioners shall remain stayed in the aforesaid case.
With the aforesaid direction, this petition is finally disposed of.
Learned AGA shall communicate this order to the concerned authorities.
(Mrs. Rekha Dixit,J) ( Ramesh Sinha,J)
Order Date :- 21.11.2016
G.S
