Sunil Singh @ Sunil Kumar Singh vs State Of U.P. Thru Secretary Home & ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 1956 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 9
 

 
Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 3212 of 2021
 

 
Petitioner :- Sunil Singh @ Sunil Kumar Singh
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Secretary Home & Ors.
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Prem Chandra Chauhan,Ram Pal Singh Chauhan
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

Heard Shri Prem Chandra Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Anurag Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.

This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking quashing of the F.I.R. No. 0418 of 2020, under Sections 323, 504, 306 I.P.C., P.S. Sandhana, District Sitapur. A further prayer of mandamus has been sought commanding respondent no. 3 not to arrest the petitioner in the impugned F.I.R.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the deceased committed suicide for the reasons best known to him as the cause of death is asphyxia due to ante mortem injury (hanging).

Learned A.G.A., on the other hand, submits that a fight had taken place between the parties on 25.12.2020 at 2 p.m. in the afternoon, in which, the petitioner along with three other accused persons assaulted the victim, who thereafter committed suicide. He further submits that the participation of the petitioner cannot be ruled out. He also submits that from the perusal of the First Information Report, a cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner and, therefore, the present writ petition be dismissed.

The Full Bench of this Court in Ajit Singh @ Muraha Vs. State of U.P. and others : (2006) 56 ACC 433 reiterated the view taken by the earlier Full Bench in Satya Pal Vs. State of U.P. and others : 2000 Cr.L.J. 569 after considering the various decisions including State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal and others : 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.

Further the Apex Court in the case of State of Telangana v. Habib Abdullah Jellani : (2017) 2 SCC 779 has disapproved an order restraining the Investigating Agencies arresting the accused where prayer of quashing the First Information Report has been refused.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and in view of the judgments cited above, we are not inclined to interfere in the matter. Further, 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.

Accordingly, this writ petition fails and stands dismissed.

(Rajeev Singh, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)

Order Date :- 3.2.2021

VKS