Amar Saran and S.C.Nigam, JJ. - (1.) HEARD Sri Amit Daga, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Advocate. A supplementary-affidavit has also been filed today annexing therein a copy of an application by the Investigating Officer (I.O.) under Section 169, Cr. P.C.
(2.) THIS petition has been filed for quashing an F.I.R. dated 22.8.2008 in Case Crime No. 314 of 2008 under Sections 177, 195 and 182, I.P.C. and 3 (2) (i), (ii), S.C./S.T. Act at Police Station Lahchura, district Jhansi and for stay of the arrest of the petitioners during the pendency of the writ petition. The allegations in the F.I.R. in a nutshell were that the petitioner Ram Babu Dixit in collusion with the other petitioners had deliberately lodged a false first information report on 15.4.08, so that the informant in the impugned F.I.R. Udal, S/o Tutti Chamar and his companion Ram Pratap could be falsely implicated in a murder case punishable with imprisonment for life. Udal had made this allegation in his F.I.R. because he had been freed only after staying in jail from 21.4.08 to 3.6.08 after the new Investigating Officer had submitted an application under Section 169, Cr. P.C. to the effect that Udal had been falsely implicated by the uncle of the deceased, the petitioner Ram Babu Dixit and others, and that in view of the insufficiency of evidence against him he may be released. A perusal of the application under Section 169, Cr. P.C. shows that the conclusion of the Investigating Officer regarding the innocence of the informant Udal and the falsity of the F.I.R. against him and Ram Pratap by the petitioner Ram Babu Dixit and others is based on the Section 164, Cr. P.C. statements of the father and mother of the deceased, Rajendra Dixit and Smt. Asha Rani Dixit, who have clearly stated that their son the deceased Mukesh had been murdered by his uncle Surendra and his sons Ranoo and Babbi Dixit and the involvement of the informant Udal was found false. We think that such allegations of implicating poor persons belonging to the Scheduled Caste for a murder of his own nephew Mukesh Dixit by the informant petitioner Ram Babu Dixit in collusion with the other petitioners to shield his other brother and nephews who have been nominated for this crime by the mother and father of the deceased Mukesh Dixit, and because of which the informant Udal even had to stay in jail from 21.4.08 to 3.6.08 are extremely grave.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners submits firstly, that as there was only an application under Section 169, Cr. P.C. by the Investigating Officer and no judgment of acquittal of Udal and others in the murder case upto this stage, the F.I.R. against him was premature. We are not in agreement with this contention. As the Section 169, Cr. P.C. report of the Investigating Officer, was based on the statements under Section 164, Cr. P.C. of the mother and father of the deceased, Mukesh which show that Udal and his companion had falsely been implicated in this murder case by the petitioner Ram Babu Dixit and other petitioners to save his other brother Surendra, and nephews, we see no difficulty in an F.I.R. being lodged against the said persons at this stage, if in the view of the Investigating Officer a prima facie case is disclosed showing the complicity of the petitioners in giving information to a public servant (police officer) which they knew to be false, intending thereby to cause such public servant to do something to the injury of the informant, which meets the requirement of Section 182, I.P.C. There is no requirement in law that the F.I.R. against the petitioners could only be lodged after the eventual acquittal of the informant and other co-accused in the murder case.;