Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 395 (UTT)

Shivendra Kumar Singh v. State Of Uttarakhand

2019-07-09

MANOJ K.TIWARI

body2019
JUDGMENT : Manoj K. Tiwari, J. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners for quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 04.07.2019, registered as C.I.R. No. 0037 of 2019, under Section 354(a)(1) of I.P.C. and Section 9c, 9m, 10 of POCSO Act, 2012 at Police Station Banbasa, District Champawat. Further prayer has been made for commanding the respondents not to arrest the petitioner in view of the impugned F.I.R. during the pendency of the writ petition. 2. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the instant crime. He further submits that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and there is no public witness of the alleged incident. 3. 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. 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. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner then prayed that petitioners will surrender before the Court concerned and the concerned Court may be directed to decide his bail application same day. 5. The petitioner is directed to appear before the Court concerned on or before 15.07.2019. It is made clear that as soon as the petitioner appears before the Court below and move bail application, the same shall be considered, as far as possible on the same day itself on its merit. 5. The petitioner is directed to appear before the Court concerned on or before 15.07.2019. It is made clear that as soon as the petitioner appears before the Court below and move bail application, the same shall be considered, as far as possible on the same day itself on its merit. In case, bail application is deferred for any reasons (including its rejection), the concerned Court shall forward the papers to the Sessions Court for deciding the bail application on the same day itself. 6. Let certified copy of this order be supplied to the petitioner today itself, on payment of usual charges.