Allahabad High Court
Shyam Lal vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 8 December, 2020
Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Samit Gopal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 1 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 12199 of 2020 Petitioner :- Shyam Lal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shree Prakash Giri,Siddhartha Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Shree Prakash Giri, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Gaurav Pratap Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
This writ petition has been filed, seeking a writ of mandamus, directing the respondent concerned, not to arrest the petitioner Shyam Lal, with a further prayer for quashing the impugned FIR dated 09.10.2020 registered as Case Crime No. 0235 of 2020 under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. West Tola, District Mau.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case only on the basis of two cases. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in Case Crime No. 134 of 2020 under Sections 188, 269, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., under Section 3 Epidemic Act 1897, under Section 15 Environment Protection Act 1986, and Section 63 Foods Safety and Standard Act 2006 anticipatory bail has been granted by the court below and in other case being Case Crime No. 110 of 2020, under Section 270 I.P.C. he has been granted relief by the concerned police station in view of Section 41A Cr.P.C. It is thus argued that the allegations levelled against him are absolutely false, frivolous and baseless and no offence is made out against the petitioner and hence, the impugned F.I.R. be quashed.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the F.I.R. and submitted that from perusal of the F.I.R. cognizable offence is disclosed against the petitioner.
The Full Bench of this Court in Ajit Singh @ Muraha Vs. State of U.P. (2006 (56) ACC 433) reiterated the view taken by the earlier Full Bench in Satya Pal Vs. State of U.P. 92000 Cr.L.J. 569) after considering the various decisions including State of Haryana Vs. 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 petitioner.
The writ petition is dismissed.
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.
(Samit Gopal, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 8.12.2020 Naresh