Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 452 (UTT)

ANKIT BHISHMA v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2017-08-23

V.K.BIST

body2017
JUDGMENT Hon'ble V.K. Bist, J. Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:- “a) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari and quash the (Case Crime No. 91/2017) F.I.R. No. 73/2017 u/s 498A/323/504/506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act dated 12.06.2017 registered at P.S. Clement Towon, Sadar, District- Dehradun (Contained Annexure No. 3 to this writ petition). b) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 2 not to arrest the petitioners in pursuant to the (Case Crime No. 91/2017) F.I.R. No. 73/2017 u/s 498A/323/504/506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act dated 12.06.2017 registered at P.S. Clement Towon, Sadar, District- Dehradun (Contained Annexure No. 3 to this writ petition)." 2. Allegation against the petitioners is that for the demand of dowry they abused the respondent no. 3 and threatened her of dire consequences. It is stated that they behaved violently with the respondent no. 3. 3. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in the instant crime. He submitted that there is no independent evidence against the petitioners that they have ever subjected the respondent no. 3 as per her allegation in the F.I.R. It is further submitted that petitioners are living separately from respondent no. 3 and they have no concern with the demand of dowry. 4. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that there is a possibility of the compromise in the matter and for that purpose he has already filed Section 9 application. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 submitted since her husband (petitioner no. 1) has physical relations with other women and in such circumstances, there is no possibility of compromise. 6. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the contents of the F.I.R. Contents of F.I.R. prima facie disclose commission of offence. In my opinion, it is not a fit case where the Court should interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is for the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter and thereafter to file either the charge sheet or final report in the matter. The Hon'ble Apex Court, in the case of State of West Bengal. Vs. In my opinion, it is not a fit case where the Court should interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is for the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter and thereafter to file either the charge sheet or final report in the matter. The Hon'ble Apex Court, in the case of State of West Bengal. Vs. Swapna Kumar, 1982 (1) SCC 561 , has held that if an offence is disclosed, Court will not normally interfere with the investigation into the case, and will permit investigation into the offence alleged to be completed. If the FIR, prima facie, discloses the commission of an offence, the Court does not normally stop the investigation, for, to do so would be to trench upon the lawful power of the police to investigate into cognizable offences. 7. The writ petition is devoid of merit and the same is hereby dismissed. [Stay Application No. 7604 of 2017 also stands dismissed]. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioners then submitted that in case offence is made out against the petitioners, in that event, the petitioners will surrender before the Court concerned & will move the bail application and the Magistrate concerned may be directed to decide their bail applications expeditiously. Considering this submission of the learned counsel for petitioners and also considering the fact that petitioner nos. 2 & 3 are the parents of petitioner no. 1 and are old aged person, it is provided that if the petitioner nos. 2 & 3 surrender before the court concerned and seek bail; their bail applications shall be heard and decided very very expeditiously, preferably on the same day, in accordance with law.