Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 126 (UTT)

Ginni Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

2017-02-21

U.C.DHYANI

body2017
JUDGMENT : U.C. Dhyani, J. By means of present writ petition, the petitioners pray for the following reliefs, among others: “(a) Issue an order, direction or writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the first information report dated 01.02.2017 registered as Case Crime No. 07/2017, under Sections 420, 467, 468,4 71, 504 and 506 of IPC, at Police Station Laxman Jhula, District Pauri Garhwal, Annexure No. 5 colly. (b) A writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents no. 1 & 2 not to arrest or harass the petitioner in pursuance of the aforesaid information report dated 01.02.2017. ” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the State, perused the documents brought on record and considered the grounds taken up in the writ petition. 3. The allegations levelled against the petitioners are that on the basis of fake documents, they took possession of the property of the complainant/reporter and also abused, threatened him with dire consequences. 4. Considering the grounds taken in the writ petition, this Court deems it appropriate to pass the following Order: “i. It is provided that the petitioners should be arrested only when the Investigating Officer has reason to believe, on the basis of the information and material collected, that they have committed an offence. Before making arrest, the Investigating Officer is required to satisfy himself that the arrest is necessary for one or more purposes envisaged by Sub-Clauses (a) to (e) of Clause (1) of Section 41 of Cr.P.C. It will not be based upon the ipse dixit of the Police Officer. In other words, the petitioners shall be arrested only when the conditions stipulated in Sub-Clauses (a) to (e) of Clause (1) of Section 41 of Cr.P.C. are satisfied. ii. Needless to say that the Investigating Officer of the case shall abide by the aforesaid directions of Hon’ble Apex Court, before affecting the arrest of the petitioners. iii. Petitioners are directed to contact the Investigating Officer of the case on 28.02.2017, and on such subsequent dates as may be instructed by him (I.O.) for interrogation and investigation.” 5. ii. Needless to say that the Investigating Officer of the case shall abide by the aforesaid directions of Hon’ble Apex Court, before affecting the arrest of the petitioners. iii. Petitioners are directed to contact the Investigating Officer of the case on 28.02.2017, and on such subsequent dates as may be instructed by him (I.O.) for interrogation and investigation.” 5. It will be of no use keeping the present criminal writ petition pending for disposal, inasmuch as, the investigation is going on and ultimately, the investigation will come to its logical conclusion only under Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code either by a final report or by a charge sheet. The court has no occasion to interfere in between. The same is accordingly being disposed of at the admission stage itself with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, who are present. 6. In the given facts and circumstances of the present writ petition, this Court does not feel it necessary to issue notice to the private respondent. Still, liberty is granted to him to move for recall of this Order, if he feels aggrieved with the same.