Allahabad High Court
Pankaj Yadav And 5 Ors. vs State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home ... on 23 June, 2021
Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Ved Prakash Vaish
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 10
Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 12651 of 2021
Petitioner :- Pankaj Yadav And 5 Ors.
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow And Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Divaker Singh,Aman Kumar Shrivastav
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Ved Prakash Vaish,J.
The Court has convened through Video Conferencing.
Heard Shri Divaker Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Ms. Roohi Siddiqui, learned AGA for the State-respondent nos.1 to 3 and Shri Arun Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the complainant.
The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners, seeking quashing of the impugned F.I.R. dated 16.06.2021 registered as Case Crime No.257 of 2021 under Sections 307, 323, 504, 506, 34 IPC at police station Jethwara, District Pratapgarh with a further prayer to stay the arrest of the petitioners.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that there is no allegation of causing any injury to the injured person against the petitioners, as the same has been caused by co-accused, namely, Uday Bahadur Yadav @ Munna, Amar Bahadur Yadav and Aabad Ali with iron rod, as is apparent from the impugned FIR. He further submits that only general allegation of stopping the complainant has been levelled against the petitioner no.1 and general allegation of exhortation has been levelled against the petitioner nos.2 to 5. The allegation levelled against the petitioner no.6 was that he fired at the injured with country made pistol with an intention to kill, but the injured did not receive any injury, thus the present FIR has been lodged against the petitioners just for harassment and with oblique motive. Thus, the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed.
Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that petitioner no.2 is a minor, aged about 14 years and his date of birth is 14.02.2007 as is evident from the documentary evidence annexed as Annexure no.3 to the writ petition.
Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for quashing of the First Information Report and submitted that a cognizable offence is made out against the petitioners in the impugned FIR as they were present along with co-accused at the place of incident. He also submitted that the injured received nine injuries on his person and the fire made from country made pistol by petitioner no.6, though did not hit the injured, but in the impugned FIR it is clearly mentioned that the petitioner no.6 fired with an intention to kill, and receiving of injury of fire arm or not is irrelevant, thus, the relief as claimed by the petitioners in this writ petition cannot be granted in view of the latest judgment of the Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No.330 of 2021 (M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. The State of Maharashtra and others), and therefore, the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
After having examined the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned FIR, we are of the opinion that the impugned FIR discloses cognizable offence against the petitioners as the allegation levelled against the petitioner nos.1 is of restraining the complainant, whereas petitioner no.2 to 5 have been assigned the role of exhortation for causing injuries to the injured by the co-accused and petitioner no.6 fired at the injured with his country made pistol, but whether it hit the injured or not is irrelevant for committing the offence under Section 307 IPC. It further appears from the medical report that the injured received nine injuries on his person, hence, no interference is called for by this Court in its extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the FIR or for grant of any interim relief to the petitioner and also in view of the law laid down in M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (Supra) passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court vide judgment and order dated 13.04.2021 the present writ petition is dismissed.
So far as petitioner no.6 is concerned, him being a minor, he is at liberty to approach the Competent Authority for appropriate legal remedy.
The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by it alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person(s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number(s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked, before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
(Ved Prakash Vaish, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
Order Date :- 23.6.2021
Arnima
