Court No. - 20 Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 7117 of 2010 Petitioner :- Dharmendra & Others Respondent :- State Of U.P., Thru. Prin. Secy.,Home & Others Petitioner Counsel :- Vyas Narayan Shukla Respondent Counsel :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Mani Chauhan,J.
Hon’ble Virendra Kumar Dixit,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the
State as well as perused the record.
This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has
been filed by the petitioners for quashing the impugned First
Information Report dated 01.7.2010 lodged by the Opposite Party No. 3
at Crime No. 351/2010, under Sections 147/323/324/504/506 IPC and 3
(i) (x) SC/ST Act registered at Police Station Haliapur, District
Sultanpur and also for direction to the opposite parties not to arrest them
in pursuance of the said impugned First Information Report.
The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the
electrification work was going on in the village. The contractor who
was entrusted the electric work was carrying away electric poles. The
petitioner No. 1 objected and requested him to change the way. There
had been some altercation on this point which took the shape of maarpit
between both the parties. Four persons from the side of petitioners
sustained injures. The petitioner No. 1 (Dharmendra) has lodged a First
Information Report against the complainant and others. The
complainant has lodged the impugned first information report by way of
counterblast. The petitioners, therefore, deserve interim protection.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the petition.
Considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.G.A. for the State. We have gone through the contents of the
First Information Report which disclose the commission of cognizable
offence and as such it cannot be quashed.
The Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed.
Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case
as well as the fact that there had been maarpit for both the sides and the
nature of offence, it is provided that in case the petitioners appear before
the court below and move any application for bail, the same will be
disposed of by both the courts below expeditiously preferably on the
same day in view of the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court
in Shrimati Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in [2004
CBC page 705] and by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Lal Kamlendra
Pratap Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others reported in
[(2009) 4 Supreme Court Cases 437].
Order Date :- 29.7.2010
Santosh/-