Court No. - 20 Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 7044 of 2010 Petitioner :- Mohammad Azeez Respondent :- The State And Others Petitioner Counsel :- Amit Srivastava Respondent Counsel :- Govt.Advocate Hon'ble Raj Mani Chauhan,J.
Hon’ble Virendra Kumar Dixit,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. and perused the
F.I.R.
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by
the petitioner for quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 16.07.2010 registered as
Case Crime No.245 of 2010, under sections 306, 323 I.P.C., Police Station
Gudamba, District Lucknow and also for direction to the opposite parties not
to arrest the petitioner in pursuance to the said impugned F.I.R.
The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the First
Information Report was lodged by the complainant on 16.07.2010. As per
version of the complainant the accused had withheld the materials of the
deceased relating to his tent business. When the deceased went to petitioner to
take back his materials he was beaten by him, therefore he committed suicide.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that a suicide note is said to have
been left by the deceased which is said to have been written on 13.07.2010
while the First Information Report has been lodged on 16.07.2010. Learned
counsel for the petitioner further submits that the suicide note appears to be
concocted. Further submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that
the deceased had taken money from so many persons and they were
demanding for their refund. The deceased was not in a position to repay their
dues, therefore, he himself committed suicide. Moreover the deceased in the
suicide note had levelled the allegations against the others too but they have
not been arrayed as accused. There is no evidence against the petitioner that
he had compelled the deceased to commit suicide. The petitioner, therefore
deserves protection.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the petition and argued that the main allegation is
against the accused.
We have gone through the contents of the F.I.R. which disclose the
commission of cognizable offence and as such it cannot be quashed.
The petition is, therefore, dismissed.
However, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, it is
provided that in case the petitioner appears before the court concerned and
moves any bail application, the same will be disposed of by the courts below
expeditiously.
Order Date :- 28.7.2010
PAL