Sharvan And Another ... vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 353 UK

        HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

                Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 297 of 2021

Sharvan and another                                                  .....Petitioners

                                     Versus

State of Uttarakhand and others                                 ....Respondents
Present:- Mr. Vaibhav Singh Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioners.
          Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, A.G.A for the State.

                                 JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

Petitioners challenge FIR No. 92 of 2021, under Sections 332, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station SIDCUL, District Hardiwar and also seek directions that the petitioners may not be arrested pursuant to the FIR.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. According to the FIR, the informant was directed by his superior officers to stop illegal mining in an area. Pursuant to it, when the informant alongwith one of his colleague visited village Daluwala Kalan, they saw two tractor trolleys involved in illegal mining. Sensing fear, the petitioners and two other persons, managed to escape alongwith their tractor trolleys, forcibly they also abused and did maar peet with the informant and his colleague and also threatened them to life.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the informant was not a Revenue Inspector of that area; he had prior enmity with the petitioners; there is no medical examination report, no injury report and even it is not stated as to how come the informant came to know the names of the petitioners.

5. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The FIR is categorical. The informant states that he had visited the spot under the instruction of his superior officers, by which, he was directed to stop illegal mining and he reached there alongwith another Revenue Inspector and thereafter, according to the FIR, the incident occurred. They were abused, beaten and threatened to life and also the petitioners alongwith their associates, ran-away from the spot, forcibly taking away the tractor trolleys filled with minerals. It discloses offences. What is its reliability, credibility, these are subjects, which falls for scrutiny during investigation. Whatever questions have been posed by the learned counsel for the petitioners, they would perhaps be answered by the Investigating Officer of the case. Therefore, this Court sees no reason to make any interference and the writ petition deserves to be dismissed.

6. At this stage learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that directions may be issued that in case of surrender, the bail application of the petitioners may be considered on the same day.

7. The instant writ petition is dismissed.

8. However, in case the petitioners appear before the court concerned and apply for bail, their bail applications may be decided as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) (Vacation Judge) 17.02.2021 Shubham