Sharda Devi & Others vs State of U.P. & Others

B.N. Shukla, J.—No one is present on behalf of the petitioner even in the revised list. We have heard learned A.G.A. appearing for the Staterespondents.

This writ petition has been filed for quashing the first information report registered as Case Crime No. 881 of 2008, under Sections? 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Jhangha, District: Gorakhpur.

Looking to the allegations in the impugned FIR and also in the facts of the case, we are of the view that the allegations in the impugned FIR, prima facie, discloses commission of cognizable offence under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 IPC and, thus, there can be no reason to quash the same. It is well settled legal position that the defence version of the accused seeking quashing of the FIR cannot be gone into under the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court at this stage as has been held by the Apex Court in the case of M.L. Bhatt v. M.K. Pandita and others, JT 2002 (3) SC 89.

In view of the facts and circumstances of this case, this writ petition is being disposed of without issuing notice to the private respondent no. 3 and in case if the said respondent is so aggrieved, he shall be at liberty to file an application for recall/modification/variation of this order.

Looking to the facts of this case and also keeping in view the observation of the Hon''ble Apex Court in the case of Joginder Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and others, 1994 Vol. 4 SCC page 260, wherein their Lordships held that no arrest should be made without a reasonable satisfaction reached after some investigation as to genuineness and bona fides of the allegations as to the persons complicity and even so as to the need to effect arrest, we feel that no useful purpose would be served by keeping this matter pending further in this Court and it would be appropriate to dispose of this writ petition at this stage with the following directions:

The investigation, if not already completed, may be completed within three months of the date on which a certified copy of this order is presented before the Investigating Officer or any police officer of the district to whom the investigating officer is directly subordinate;

The petitioners will not be arrested during pendency and for the purpose of investigation, provided a certified copy of this order is presented before the police officer as directed above within one month from today;

If certified copy is not presented within the time aforesaid, the stay of arrest will not operate;

If at the conclusion of the investigation a charge sheet is submitted instead of final report, it will be open to the Judicial Magistrate, If he decides to take cognizance, to summon the accused by summons or warrants in accordance with Section 204 Cr.PC after copies have been prepared for compliance with Section 207/208 Cr.PC;

If the chargesheet is decided to be submitted to the Court of Magistrate, in column no. 3 of the prescribed form of charge sheet it will be mentioned that the accused have not been arrested on account of stay order granted by this Court;

The accused will cooperate with the investigation and in case of noncooperation or otherwise if the Investigating Officer is of the opinion that for any other valid reason the arrest of accused is necessary during or for the purpose of investigation it will be open to the Investigating Officer to apply in this writ petition by means of a miscellaneous application giving detail of noncooperation as also details of what kind of cooperation is expected from the accused for completing investigation or why the arrest is otherwise necessary so that interim stay of arrest granted hereby may be vacated.

With the aforesaid observation, this petition stands finally disposed of.