Chotey Singh And 4 Others vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2019 Latest Caselaw 6505 ALL

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 6505 ALL
Judgement Date : 1 August, 2019

Allahabad High Court

Chotey Singh And 4 Others vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 1 August, 2019

Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Raj Beer Singh




HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 44
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 20173 of 2019
 

 
Petitioner :- Chotey Singh And 4 Others
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Trivikram Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

Heard Sri Trivikram Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Ajay Singh, learned counsel for the private respondent, Sri A.K.Sand, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.

The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 18.06.2019 registered as Case Crime No. 299 of 2019, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Jalaun, District Jalaun.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both sides have lodged FIR against each other and it is a case of no injury and the matter has been amicably settled between the parties. It has further been submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case though no offence as has been mentioned in the F.I.R. is made out against them, hence the present F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.

Learned counsel for the private respondent and learned A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for quashing of the F.I.R. which discloses cognizable offence and submitted that the offence in question is not compoundable.

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.

(Raj Beer Singh, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)

Order Date :- 1.8.2019

Anand