Arun Kumar And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 5333 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 2
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7758 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Arun Kumar And 2 Others
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State.

By way of this petition, the accused-petitioners pray for quashment of the impugned first information report dated 31.05.2022 lodged in Case Crime No. 230 of 2022 under Sections 147, 457, 380, 504, 506, 447, 427 I.P.C. Police Station Koraon, District Allahabad.

Learned counsel for the petitioners states that a Case No. 04 of 2004-05 was filed under Section 143 of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act was filed, upon which, a report was called for by Sub-Divisional Officer, Koraon, Allahabad from Tehsildar, Tehsil Koraon, District Allahabad, who submitted its report dated 28.04.2004 stating therein that Gata No. 298 is registered as Abadi but name of respondent no.3 is not recorded in the revenue record, which was dismissed vide order dated 20.04.2005. It is further submitted that co-accused Ram Bahor moved an application before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Koraon, Allahabad claiming himself to be a tenure holder of Arazi No.298 Mi., area 0.5750 hectare over which respondent no.3 is trying to construct house. Upon such application Sub-Divisional Officer directed the S.H.O. Koraon, Allahabad to take necessary action and now in order to wreak vengeance, the respondent no.3 instituted a malicious prosecution against the petitioners as well as against the co-accused persons, which is an abuse of the process of law.

The aforesaid facts are disputed questions of facts cannot be said that a writ petition would lie just because provisions of Section 41(1)(b) Cr.P.C. is followed or not followed. We are not adhere what is the stage the investigation, it would premature to hold that the judgement of this Court is not adhered by the police under Section 41A of the Cr.P.C.

The judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Joginder Kumar Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others, 1994 UPCr.R. 436 as well as Full Bench judgment of this Hon'ble Court in Amarawati Vs. State of U.P. and others, ACC 2004 (3) 742 cited by learned counsel for petitioners in paragraph 17 of memo of petition are not applicable to the facts of this case.

In that view of the matter, we are unable to persuade ourselves to exercise our extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India quashing the FIR.

In view of the above, this petition lacks merits and is dismissed.

Order Date :- 22.6.2022

Abhishek Singh