Court No. - 20 Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 6618 of 2010 Petitioner :- Raj Kumar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P., Thru. Secretary, Home & Others Petitioner Counsel :- Arun Kumar Mishra Respondent Counsel :- G.A. 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 petitioners for quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 10.05.2010 registered
as Case Crime No.293 of 2010, under sections 467, 468, 471, 420, 171 I.P.C.,
Police Station Kurwar, District Sultanpur and also for direction to the
opposite parties not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance to the said impugned
F.I.R.
The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner
is a fair price shop licensee. A complaint was received by the Sub Divisional
Magistrate (SDM) regarding non distribution of kerosene oil. The license
granted to him was suspended. In fact the allegations were false, therefore so
many villagers approached to the SDM and filed their affidavits stating that
no irregularity in distribution of kerosene oil, food grains and sugar had been
committed by the petitioner and on the basis of those affidavits the SDM after
being satisfied revoked the suspension order of license of the petitioner.
Thereafter the First Information Report was lodged by the complainant
against the petitioner who had filed two affidavits which apparently were
found to be false. Learned counsel submits that in fact the affidavits had been
filed in bulk it appears that on account of typographical error two affidavits
had been signed in the name of same person i.e. Surendra Kumar. In fact the
affidavits were not prepared by the petitioner rather the persons themselves
had got the affidavits prepared. Therefore no offence is made out against the
petitioner.
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 :- 16.7.2010
PAL