Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 71 (UTT)

Somwati v. State of Uttarakhand

2018-02-23

V.K.BIST

body2018
JUDGMENT : V.K. BIST, J. 1. Petitioners have approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:- “I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 18.01.2018 registered as Case crime no. 20 of 2018 under Section 328, 376, 354, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4/13 of Protection of Children from Sexual offence Act PS Kotwali Gangnahar Roorkee, District Haridwar. II. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to arrest the petitioners in Case crime no. 20 of 2018 under Section 328, 376, 354, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4/13 of Protection of Children from Sexual offence Act PS Kotwali Gangnahar Roorkee, District Haridwar.” 2. Allegation in the F.I.R. is that co-accused Vasu took the complainant with him to the house of one of his friend and there he gave the complainant some intoxicated substance through cold drink and committed rape upon her and also made video clipping from his mobile. Thereafter, Vasu and his two friends outraged her modesty. It is further alleged in the F.I.R. that on 02.01.2018 complainant called by Vasu to come his house, where Vasu, his sisters Renu & Monika (petitioner no. 2 & 3) and the mother of Vasu Somwati (petitioner no. 1) threatened her and pressurized to put signature on stamp paper in which it was written that complainant is committing suicide and when complainant denied to do so the petitioners threatened her with dire consequences. 3. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioners have falsely been implicated in the instant crime. He submitted that petitioners have been implicated in the instant crime only due to reason that they are mother, sister and brother of co-accused Vasu. 4. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties 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. 5. The writ petition is devoid of merit and the same is hereby dismissed. [Stay Application No. 1969 of 2018 also stands dismissed]. 6. 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 applications and the Magistrate concerned may be directed to decide their bail applications same day. Considering this submission of the learned counsel for petitioners, it is provided that if the petitioners surrender before the court concerned and seeks bail; their bail applications shall be heard and decided expeditiously, preferably same day, in accordance with law.