The Allahabad High Court has refused to quash the First Information Report against the petitioner, observing that the defence of the accused cannot be looked into while considering the writ petition.
The Division Bench of Justice Anjani Kumar Mishra and Justice Deepak Verma passed this order while hearing a Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition filed by Kalicharan.
The petition seeks quashing of the impugned FIR dated December 14, 2021 registered as case under Section 302, 120-B IPC, Police Station Izzat Nagar, District Bareilly.
Contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that the deceased and the petitioner were both teachers. The deceased suffered accidental burn injuries and was admitted to the hospital at the instance of the petitioner himself.
On her condition deteriorating and for providing ventilator support, she was shifted to a hospital at Bareilly, from where she was referred to Delhi, where she expired on March 18, 2021.
After her death, the body was handed over to her father. Six months later, an application under Section 156(3) CrPC was filed by the first informant, whereupon the impugned First Information Report has been registered.
Also Read: Meghalaya High Court directs state govt to implement plans for cancer patients
It has also been vehemently argued that prior to filing the application under Section 156(3) CrPC, the first informant has made a complaint to the police authorities and that an enquiry was held. The enquiry report which is in favour of the petitioner, has been filed on record.
On the strength of the aforenoted arguments, it has been submitted that the petitioner is entitled to stay of his arrest.
The Counsel appearing for the first informant stated that there was a prior dispute pertaining to demand of dowry and that a compromise was entered into between the parties, after which the deceased started residing with the petitioner. However, even thereafter, the first informant had been telephonically informed by his daughter that she was being harassed for dowry.
It has also been submitted that the first informant called his daughter on her mobile phone on March 14, 2021. The call was received by the petitioner and the first informant was informed that all was well. The first informant later, on March 18, 2021, received a call from the petitioner, informing him of the death of the deceased.
Also Read: Delhi High Court issues notice for the appointment of DMRC managing director
It is contended that no prior information was given to the first informant about the alleged incident and the treatment, which is stated to have taken place at various hospitals.
Upon hearing counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the First Information Report, the Court found that it contains the ingredients of cognizable offence. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the First Information Report, we find that it contains the ingredients of cognizable offence. The First Information Report cannot be quashed on the basis of submissions that have been made by learned counsel for the petitioner which are, in fact, his defence. It is settled law that the defence of the accused cannot be looked into while considering the writ petition seeking quashing of the First Information Report.
Accordingly, the Court dismissed the writ petition.