Allahabad High Court
Arvind Kumar Singh (Wrong Name Arvinder ... vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 22 December, 2022
Author: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 47 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 20038 of 2022 Petitioner :- Arvind Kumar Singh (Wrong Name Arvinder Singh) Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Arun Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned AGA and perused the impugned F.I.R, as well as material brought on record.
The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R, dated 23.07.2022 registered as Case Crime No.184 of 2022, under sections 409, 420, 120B IPC P.S. Kotwali, District Kanpur Nagar and for a direction to respondents not to arrest the petitioner pursuant to aforesaid FIR.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The allegations levelled against them are absolutely false, frivolous and baseless. From a perusal of the FIR, no offence is made out against the petitioner, hence, the same be quashed.
Learned A.G.A, opposed the prayer for quashing of the F.I.R, which discloses cognizable offence. He has further submitted that truthfulness of allegations and establishment of guilt take place, when the investigation is done or trial proceeds. Probability, reliability or genuineness cannot be looked under Art.226 of the Constitution. The FIR can only be quashed in a writ jurisdiction, if the FIR does not discloses commission of offence and that too prior to framing of charges. As such it is submitted that no interfere is required in the matter.
The Full Bench of this Court in Ajit Singh @ Muraha v. State of U.P. (2006 (56) ACC 433) reiterated the view taken by the earlier Full Bench in Satya Pal v. State of U.P. (2000 Cr.L.J. 569) after considering the various decisions including State of Haryana v. 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 leaving it open for the petitioner to apply before the competent court for anticipatory bail/bail as permissible under law and in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 22.12.2022 Mohit