Allahabad High Court
Rajendra Bihar Lal vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 9 January, 2023
Author: Anjani Kumar Mishra
Bench: Anjani Kumar Mishra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 46 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 324 of 2023 Petitioner :- Rajendra Bihar Lal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anuj Srivastava,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J.
Hon'ble Gajendra Kumar,J.
The instant petition seeks quashing of the impugned F.I.R. dated 15.04.2022 giving rise to Case Crime No.224 of 2022, under Sections 153A, 506, 420, 467, 468 of IPC and Section 3/5(1) of U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, Police Station- Kotwali, District- Fatehpur with a further prayer directing the respondents no.2 & 3 not to arrest the petitioner in the aforesaid case.
Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that on 14.04.2022 an incident of forcible/fraudulent conversion to Christianity came to light in Fatehpur in which 35 persons have been named in the First Information Report. Perusal of the said FIR also reflects that about 30 unknown persons ran away from the spot. It is admitted that the petitioner is Vice Chancellor of Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture, Technology & Sciences. He has no concern or connection with the incident of 14.04.2022. Yet, in pursuance of aforesaid First Information Report, Investigating Officer has proceeded with the matter and a notice dated 26.12.2022 under Section 41(1) Cr.P.C. has been issued to the petitioner, to which, he has filed reply on 28.12.2022. It is further submitted that the investigation is under process and the charge-sheet has also not been submitted in the matter. The petitioner is being harassed unnecessarily. Hence this petition.
Learned AGA submitted that since the petitioner is not named in the First Information Report, he has no locus to challenge the same.
We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
It is not in dispute that the petitioner is not named in the First Information Report. While dealing with a writ petition seeking quashing of a First Information Report, it is the settled position that upon a bare perusal of the First Information Report and accepting every word, therein, to be correct, if no offence is disclosed, First Information Report is liable to be quashed.
In the case at hand, since the petitioner is not named in the First Information Report, he cannot allege that there are allegations against him. Therefore, we have no hesitation that petitioner has no locus to challenge the First Information Report, wherein he is not named. If during course of investigation of a First Information Report wherein the petitioner is not named certain evidence comes to light which may or may not point to the culpability of the petitioner, the same is of no consequence insofar as the Writ Court is concerned. Any evidence that may be collected during an investigation is not the subject matter of a writ petition seeking quashing of the First Information Report because the same is not to be considered or appreciated by the writ Court.
In view of above and for the reasons already given, this writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable.
Order Date :- 9.1.2023 SK Goswami