Brajesh And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2018 Latest Caselaw 1047 ALL

Citation : 2018 Latest Caselaw 1047 ALL
Judgement Date : 29 May, 2018

Allahabad High Court

Brajesh And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 29 May, 2018

Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Dinesh Kumar Singh-I




HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 1
 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 14074 of 2018
 
Petitioner :- Brajesh And 3 Others
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.

Heard Sri A.K.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri N.K.Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned FIR as well as material brought on record.

The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 19.4.2018, registered as case crime No.80 of 2018, under Sections 308, 325, 504, 506, 323 I.P.C., Police Station Jalalpur, District Jaunpur.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case with malafide intention due to old election enmity. He further submitted that there is a police report wherein it is stated that the injured received injuries as he was in drunken state.The allegations levelled against the petitioners are absolutely false, frivolous and baseless. From a perusal of the FIR, no offence is made out against the petitioners, hence, the same be quashed.

Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR and submitted that as per the allegation has been levelled against the petitioners for assaulting the injured and the FIR which discloses cognizable offence.

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.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)

Order Date :- 29.5.2018/NS