VIPIN SINHA,J. - (1.) These are two writ petitions being Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 31343 of 2018 and Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 31370 of 2018. The writ petitioners in the first writ petition are Pankaj Rastogi, Mohit Rastogi and Ketan Kumar Shah whereas the writ petitioners in the second writ petition are Smt. Tanya Rastogi and Ambuj Rastogi. The record shows that both the writ petitions have been filed being aggrieved against the lodging of the FIR dated 22.10.2018 by one Ruchir Rastogi (respondent no.4 in the first writ petition and respondent no.3 in the second writ petition). The FIR was registered as Case Crime No.0128 of 2018 under Sections 457, 380 and 506 IPC PS Pheelkhana District Kanpur Nagar. As the relief sought in both the writ petitions is absolutely identical i.e. quashing of the aforesaid FIR dated 22.10.2018 registered as Case Crime No.0128 of 2018 and in both the writ petitions the FIR has been annexed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition, therefore with the consent of all the parties concerned, both the writ petitions were taken up for hearing together and both the writ petitions are being decided by means of the present common order while treating Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.31343 of 2018 as the leading case.
(2.) We have heard Shri G.S. Chaturvedi, learned senior counsel assisted by Shri Shishir Tandon, learned counsel for the petitioners in the first writ petition i.e. Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 31343 of 2018, Shri Dileep Kumar and Shri Rajrshi Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioners in the second writ petition i.e. Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 31370 of 2018, Shri Manish Tiwary, learned counsel for the complainant Ruchir Rastogi in both the writ petitions and Shri Rajesh Mishra, learned AGA appearing for the State in both the writ petitions.
(3.) After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners and the contentions as have been raised at the Bar of this Court, the factual position as it emerges can be crystallized herein as under:- The impugned FIR has been lodged by Ruchir Rastogi in his capacity as a partner of H.U.F. M/s Lala Jugal Kishore and Sons having a business showroom at 26/59 Birhana Road, Kanpur Nagar. The relevant extract of the said FIR is being quoted herein below:- ...[VARNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]... A Keeping in view the aforesaid allegations as have been made in the FIR and factual position as is revealed as per the contentions as made at the Bar of this Court and as per the averments made in the writ petition, the facts, in brief, are that petitioner no.1 is the uncle (Chacha) of respondent no.4 and petitioner nos.2 and 3 are the employees of petitioner no.1. The partnership between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.4 has come into existence on 1.4.2012 in pursuance of a partnership deed dated 1.4.2012. It has been contended that thereafter some dispute had arisen between the partners and both the parties i.e. petitioner no.1 and respondent no.4 agreed to settle their dispute through Arbitrator, due to which five persons were nominated on 3.8.2014 to settle their dispute. However, it appears that subsequently a petition was filed before the District Judge, Kanpur Nagar with the prayer that a receiver be appointed to take possession, custody and management of the partnership business and on the said petition, the District Judge, Kanpur Nagar vide order dated 11.11.2013 had directed herein as under:- (copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-5) "The Application 4Kha is decided accordingly. The entire assets, belongings of the firm M/s Lala Jugal Kishore and Sons at Premises No.26/59, Birhana Road, Kanpur Nagar shall be preserved till the making of the arbitral award before it is enforced in accordance with Section 26 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act." ;