Allahabad High Court
Dinesh Kumar Dubey vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 22 May, 2018
Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Dinesh Kumar Singh-I
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 13132 of 2018
Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar Dubey
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Suresh Chandra Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri S.C.Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri G.P.Singh, 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 4.1.2018, registered as case crime No.2 of 2018, under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Swaroop Nagar, District Kanpur Nagar.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that the petitioner is Director of Vandana Medical & Surgical Center, situated in Raja Talab, Varanasi. The respondent no.4 was admitted in the hospital of petitioner from 11.7.2017 to 19.7.2017. The respondent no.4 was insured with the Health Scheme from The New India Assurance Company Ltd. The said Company provided cashless facility to respondent no.4. He next argued that after discharge of respondent no.4 from the hospital of the petitioner, the New India Assurance Company Ltd. on 18.8.2017 made payment of Rs.1,27,389/-in favour of the petitioner's hospital, a copy of payment of receipts is annexed as Annexure-7 to the writ petition. He argued that in the impugned FIR it is stated by respondent no.4 that the petitioner has prepared forged bills regarding her medical treatment amounting to Rs.1,71,543/- and got the same from the Insurance Company. The allegations levelled against the petitioner is absolutely false, frivolous and baseless. No offence is made out against the petitioner, hence, the FIR is liable to be quashed.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of 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 petitioner.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
Order Date :- 22.5.2018/NS
