JUDGMENT Hon’ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner today in the Court is taken on record. 2. This petition is filed by one of the accused Narendra Singh Dhami seeking for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to quash the First Information Report dated 29.12.201J pertaining to case crime no. 122 of 2012 under Section 307, 323 IPC police station Kotwali Pithoragarh. It has also been prayed that till the final disposal of petition, Government / police should be directed not to arrest the petitioner’ in pursuance to that FIR. The petition has been resisted by learned counsel for the respondents. 3. Having heard the pros and cons of the case, it transpires that injured Lalit Mohan Singh Chauhan, resident of Pithoragarh town, having finished his work in Prince Bar located in Pithoragarh town itself, was returning to his home on 28.12.2011 at about 9.30-9.45 p.m. while on the way he was engulfed by Narendra Singh Dhami (petitioner) assisted by his real brother Milap Singh Dhami and Narendra Kathayat along with one Himmat Singh Kunwar (a man of Nepali origin). All the same, the entire case diary wherein evidence have been collected by the Investigating Officer is not before this Court at this stage but it appears from perusal of statement of injured Lalit Mohan recorded on 01.03.2012 under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that on the fateful night, Narendra Singh Dhami, Milap Singh Dhami and Narendra Kathayat all of a sudden caught hold of him and gave blow of stone on his head making him unconscious. All these three persons assisted by Himmat Singh Kunwar manhandled him severely. The beating caused his jaw chin broken. When the injured was tossing about his life, all the accused persons left him at the side of the road with an understanding that injured then had died. But somehow the owner of Bar Ravindra Chandra got information about this incident so he rushed to the spot and shifted Lalit Mohan to District Hospital. On the next day, since the condition of injured Lalit Mohan was serious, he was shifted to Ram Murti Samarak Medical College, Bareilly for better treatment. He remained hospitalized there for a long time and his right cheek was operated. 4. On the next day, since the condition of injured Lalit Mohan was serious, he was shifted to Ram Murti Samarak Medical College, Bareilly for better treatment. He remained hospitalized there for a long time and his right cheek was operated. 4. Lalit Mohan has disclosed in his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P’C, that this incident has been reported to the police station Pithoragarh by his real nephew Deepak Chauhan with wrong facts naming only Himmat Singh Kunwar as an accused. He has disclosed that real assailants were all the three afore-named persons assisted by one more person, regarding whom he does not know whether he was Nepali or some other. He has admitted that he went to police station Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar for lodging the true report along with his some relatives but his report could not be lodged because it had already been reported by Deepak Chauhan (respondent no. 2) in Pithoragarh. Deepak Chauhan reported the matter in the intervening night of 28/29 December 2011 at 02.30 a.m. 5. It has been argued on behalf of the petitioner that an Officer of Nainital High Court, since being relative of injured Lalit Mohan, tried to lodge the report at police station Khatima, hence abusing his position as such. 6. Be that as it may, it appears that position of High Court official (if any) could not have any bearing, at any stage, on the police because the report could not be lodged at police station Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar and the SHO, Khatima has simply forwarded the report along with his covering letter to police station Pithoragarh where the report had already been lodged. Lalit Mohan (injured) has narrated in so many words that the real culprits are the afore-named three persons, who were being assisted by Himmat Singh Kunwar. 7. It has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Lalit Mohan (injured) has reduced the intensity of crime by narrating that Milap Singh Dhami and Narendra Singh Dhami gave blows of their fists, which could not have broken jaw/chin of injured. 8. It is pertinent to mention that the entire statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C is not before this Court, it is only excerpt, which has been reproduced by the Investigating Officer in a summarized manner. 8. It is pertinent to mention that the entire statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C is not before this Court, it is only excerpt, which has been reproduced by the Investigating Officer in a summarized manner. In the absence of full statement of Lalit Mohan under Section 164 Cr.P.C., at this stage the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. is worthy to be considered by this Court. Besides the statement of Deepak Chauhan recorded soon after the incident by the Investigating Officer is Annexure no. 3 to the petition. From the perusal of this statement, it is divulged that when Deepak Chauhan reached at the spot, he found three accused aforenamed were present there. They adverted that his uncle has been assaulted by Himmat Singh Kunwar, making him severely injured. The accused persons also informed him that they (accused persons) were also got injured while striving to save Lalit Mohan. 9. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court towards the injury report of petitioner Narendra Singh Dhami, who was examined at District Hospital, Pithoragarh on 29.12.2011 at 10.40 a.m. Injury report shows an abraded conlusion on the right cheek and abrasion of little dimension over the left dorsem of the head. These injuries, being minor in nature, are not significant. 10. It has been argued on behalf of the respondent no. 2 that other two accused persons are in caption and as a result of long investigation by the police formidable evidence have beencollected against Narendra Singh Dhami, so this Court feels at this stage, when the Investigating Officver has collected sufficient evidence against accused Narendra Singh Dhami andtrue facts now have been determined under the investigation, it is not proper to stay the arrest of petitioner on the basis of factthat in such FIR petitioner was not named as real assailant. 11. Needless to say that the report lodged by Deepak Chauhan was based on the information given to him by the assailants themselves because at the relevant time, injured Lalit Mohan was admitted in the hospital though in conscious state but unable to speak anything from his utterance to name out the real culprits. 12. For the foregoing reasons, the petition has no merits and liable to be dismissed. The petition is accordingly dismissed at the threshold.