Allahabad High Court
Vijay Karan Singh And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 1 December, 2020
Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Samit Gopal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 1 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 12152 of 2020 Petitioner :- Vijay Karan Singh And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ganesh Mani Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Ganesh Mani, learned counsel for the petitioners, Ms. Archana Singh, learned AGA for the State and perused the First Information Report and the material on record.
The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners, namely, Vijay Karan Singh, Smt. Kusumawati @ Krishna Devi, Kiran and Rajveer Singh seeking quashing of the First Information Report of Case Crime No.864, under Sections 498A, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P.Act, Police Station Naubasta, District Kanpur Nagar with a further prayer to stay of their arrest during the pendency of the investigation of the said case.
At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner nos. 1 and 2, namely, Vijay Karan Singh,, Smt. Kusumawati @ Krishna Devi, Kiran who are father-in-law and mother-in-law respectively of the daughter of respondent no.4 have already been arrested by the police, hence, the present petition with respect to them has become infructuous.
Accordingly, the present writ petition with respect to petitioner nos. 1 and 2, namely, Vijay Karan Singh,, Smt. Kusumawati @ Krishna Devi, Kiran is dismissed as having become infructuous.
So far as petitioner nos. 3 & 4, namely, Kiran and Rajveer Singh are concerned, learned counsel for the petitioners argued that they are married nanad and nondoi of daughter of respondent no.4 and they have been falsely implicated in the present case with malafide intention. The marriage between the son of applicant nos.1 and 2, namely, Devendra Singh and daughter of respondent no.4 was solemnized in the year 2017 and after marriage some dispute arose between the husband and wife, on account of which the impugned FIR has been lodged by the respondent no.4 roping the in-laws of his daughter containing absolutely false, concocted, vague and sweeping allegations against them for demand of dowry and on account of non fulfilment of the alleged demands of dowry, his daughter has been murdered by the petitioners. It has next been submitted that apart from the bald allegations made in the FIR no credible evidence whatsoever is forthcoming even prima facie indicating at the petitioners' complicity in the commission of the alleged offence, hence the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the First Information Report and argued that the post mortem report of the deceased has not been annexed with the writ petition and further argued that from the perusal of the First Information Report, a cognizable offence is made out against the petitioners, and therefore, the present writ petition be dismissed.
The Full Bench of this Court in Ajit Singh @ Muraha Vs. State of U.P. and others : (2006) 56 ACC 433 reiterated the view taken by the earlier Full Bench in Satya Pal Vs. State of U.P. and others : 2000 Cr.L.J. 569 after considering the various decisions including State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal and others : 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.
Further the Apex Court in the case of State of Telangana v. Habib Abdullah Jellani : 2017 (2) SCC 779 has disapproved an order restraining the Investigating Agencies arresting the accused where prayer of quashing the First Information Report has been refused.
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 petitioners.
Accordingly, this writ petition fails and is dismissed with respect to petitioner nos. 3 & 4, namely, Kiran and Rajveer Singh.
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 :- 1.12.2020/NS