Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 306 (UTT)

Mohsin v. State Of Uttarakhand

2020-08-13

RAVINDRA MAITHANI

body2020
JUDGMENT Ravindra Maithani, J. - The petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 363 of 2020 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 354, 452, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Bagwanpur, District Haridwar. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties through video conferencing. 3. Fir in the instant case was lodged on 26.07.2020 at 10:03 PM. According to it, on 26.07.2020, at about 7:30 PM, a Sohail had entered in the house of the informant and grabbed his sister with wrong intention and tried to do bura kaam with her. Sohail and his associate petitioner no.2 Mon and petitioner no.8 Soyab abused and did marpeet also. This incident was reported in the evening of 26.07.2020. Due to this reason, according to the FIR, on 27.07.2020 at 9:00 in the morning at Manu Pass Bus Station, the petitioners armed with rods and lathis attacked the informant. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would argue that this FIR is counterblast to the FIR which was earlier lodged by the petitioner no. 1 Mohsin against the informant and others, which was lodged as FIR No. 362 of 2020 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Bagwanpur, District Haridwar. It is argued that, in fact, the petitioners sustained injuries in the incident; the place of incident in both the FIRs are distinct; petitioners' FIR is first in the point of time. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel would submit that during the investigation of the FIR in question, Section 354 IPC has been deleted. In both the FIRs, evidence has already been collected. 6. The FIR No. 362 of 2020, Police Station Bagwanpur, District Haridwar which has been referred to by learned counsel for the petitioners was lodged on 28.07.2020. It also states about two incidents, one dated 26.07.2020 at 7:00 in the evening and another 27.07.2020 at 9:00 in the morning at Manu Pass Bus Station. It shows that the incident occurred. 7. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Scrutiny of material to examine the credibility of witnesses is not generally done in these proceedings. As stated, the FIR in question and FIR No. 362 of 2020, Police Station Bagwanpur, relate to two incidents, one 26.07.2020 about 7:00 in the evening and another 27.07.2020 about 9:00 in the morning at Manu Pass bus stop. Incident as such is admitted. Scrutiny of material to examine the credibility of witnesses is not generally done in these proceedings. As stated, the FIR in question and FIR No. 362 of 2020, Police Station Bagwanpur, relate to two incidents, one 26.07.2020 about 7:00 in the evening and another 27.07.2020 about 9:00 in the morning at Manu Pass bus stop. Incident as such is admitted. The questions is as to whether it was a free fight or one of the parties was aggressor and another defender, but, these are the questions which fall in the domain of Investigating Officer, who will scrutinise and examine them to unearth the truth. 8. Therefore, this Court is of the view that no interference is warranted in these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 9. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that directions may be given that arrest should not be made in routine and a mechanical manner. Undoubtedly, arrest is not a routine and mechanical act of the Investigation Officer. Before affecting arrest, the Investigating Officer has to satisfy himself about the complicity of the person intended to be arrested and the need for arresting. This court has no doubt that Investigating Officer in the instant case shall follow all the statutory provisions and directions on the subject. 10. With the above observation, the instant petition stands disposed of.