Prem Singh @ Prahlad And Another vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2018 Latest Caselaw 926 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 1
 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 13663 of 2018
 
Petitioner :- Prem Singh @ Prahlad And Another
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.

Heard Sri Ajay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, 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 2.5.2018, registered as case crime No.445 of 2018, under Sections 323, 504,506, 341, 354 I.P.C. & Section 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Tajganj, District Agra.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case with malafide intention. He further submitted that the impugned FIR has been lodged just as a counter-blast to the FIR which was lodged from the side of the petitioners against the respondent no.3 and others for an incident in which petitioners' side received injures. The allegations levelled against the petitioners are absolutely false, frivolous and baseless.No offence is made out against the petitioners, hence, the FIR is liable to be quashed.

Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR and submitted that the two victims 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 :- 25.5.2018/NS