Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 9 (UTT)

BHUPESH CHANDRA POKHARIYA v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2017-01-09

U.C.DHYANI

body2017
JUDGMENT U.C. Dhyani, J. (Oral) By means of present writ petition, the petitioner prays for the following reliefs, among others: “(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned FIR dated 27.08.2016 registered as Case Crime No. 02 of 2016, under Section 354 IPC, Revenue Police/Patwari Aria Babiyar, Tehsil Dhari, District Nainital. (b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to the respondents not to arrest the petitioner Case Crime No. 02 of 2016, under Section 354 IPC, Revenue Polic/Patwari Aria Babiyar, Tehsil Dhari, District Nainital, till the pendency of the present petition.” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State, perused the documents brought on record and considered the grounds taken up in the writ petition. 3. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the victim did not herself lodge the first information report. The FIR was lodged by husband of the victim alleging therein that the accused-petitioner was trying to disrobe the wife of the reporter. 4. It is provided that the petitioner should be arrested only when the Investigating Officer has reason to believe, on the basis of the information and material collected, that he has 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 petitioner 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. 5. 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 petitioner. 6. Petitioner is directed to contact the Investigating Officer of the case on 16.01.2017, and on such subsequent dates as may be instructed by him (I.O.) for interrogation and investigation. 7. 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. 7. 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. 8. 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.