Ravi Kumar vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 369 UK

      HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

                Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 9 of 2021


Ravi Kumar                                            ...Petitioner

                                 Versus

State of Uttarakhand & others                     ....Respondents

Present:-

Mrs. Pushpa Joshi, Senior Advocate for the petitioner appears through Video Conferencing.

Mr. K.S. Rawal, A.G.A. for the State.

Mr. P.C. Petshali, Advocate for the informant/respondent no. 3.

Judgment

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (oral)

Petitioner seeks quashing of an FIR No. 363 of 2020, under Sections 307 & 506 of IPC, Police Station Jaspur, District Udham Singh Nagar as also directions that the petitioner may not be arrested pursuant to the FIR.

2. The FIR has been lodged by respondent no. 3 on 25.10.2020. According to the FIR, the brother of the informant, Arjun Tomar is married to a Varsha but Varsha used to insult the informant. She also threatened that she would destroy the family of her husband and implicates them in false cases. Petitioner is the brother of Varsha. According to the FIR, the petitioner and his brother Rohit Kumar both also used to abuse and threatened the informant. The FIR states that the petitioner and his brother took their sister to their parental house while threatening the informant and his brother Arjun Tomar. In the morning of 24.10.2020 at about 6:46, according to the FIR, when the informant along with his brother was proceeding towards Jaspur on a motorcycle, they were hit from behind by a Centro Car. When they fell down, the petitioner and the co-accused alighted from the vehicle and attacked the informant and his brother, due to which, they sustained injuries. Some

persons intervened and saved the informant and his brother. There are other averments in the FIR.

3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner would submit that it is a false case. It has been lodged against the petitioner and his family members because of a matrimonial dispute between Arjun Tomar and his wife, who happens to be sister of the petitioner. Learned Senior Counsel would submit that the informant sustained certain injuries in some accident and taking advantage of it, he procured a false medical certificate just to implicate the petitioner and his family members. On 24.10.2020 no medical was prepared and after four days, a medical was procured from Jaspur, which according to the learned Senior Counsel doubts the entire FIR.

4. Apart from it, it is also argued that the medical certificate is also doubtful because the doctor opines that certain injuries were dangerous without any investigation. It is also argued that, in fact the petitioner was in Moradabad, Mandi Samiti at the time of incident.

5. On the other hand, on behalf of respondent no. 3, it is submitted that after the incident of 24.10.2020, firstly, the injured was taken at CHC Jaspur from where he was referred to higher centre. Thereafter, he was taken to L.D. Bhatt Government Hospital, Kashipur. Since there was no doctor available in the Kashipur Hospital, the injured was admitted in Govil Hospital, Kashipur and from there he was admitted to Ayushman Hospital, Kashipur. There he was further medically examined on 28.10.2020.

6. On behalf of the State, it is argued that the FIR discloses offences.

7. In this case the counter affidavit has already been filed. The injured, eye witnesses and Doctor from Ayushman Hospital,

Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar have supported the prosecution case. At the time of argument, learned counsel has also produced a medical report dated 24.10.2020 prepared by Medical Officer, CHC Jaspur, District Udham Singh Nagar, which reveals that on examination of Arjun Tomar on 24.10.2020 at 07:40 A.M., seven injures were noted and four X-rays were advised. The reference slip has also been filed on record.

8. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In case offence is disclosed, generally interference is not warranted. In the instant case, the FIR categorically discloses as to what had happened on 24.10.2020. It also records that the sister of petitioner and her husband Arjun Tomar, who is the brother of the informant, were not in very good relationship and Varsha used to insult the family members.

9. Whether the subsequent medical report dated 28.10.2020 is genuine or not? This Court cannot observe anything at this moment. It is true that in this report, the Doctor has opined that some of the injuries were grievous in nature but it also writes that this opinion was given based on X-ray report. Although, some injuries namely injury nos. 1, 2 & 3, were termed as dangerous in nature and the reason for such opinion is not given, but at this stage, this Court cannot assess the credibility of this opinion. Doctor has been examined by the Investigating Officer and he has stated about his report. There are statements of injured and eye witnesses. This Court sees no reason to make any interference and accordingly, the petition deserves to be dismissed.

10. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner at this stage would submit that directions may be issued that the bail application of the petitioner may be considered on the same day when it is presented.

11. The petition is dismissed. However, in case the petitioner appears before the Court and applies for his bail, his bail application may be decided as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) Vacation Judge 18.02.2021 AK/SB