Sanjay Tanwar And Others ... vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 228 UK

       HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

            Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 223 of 2022


Sanjay Tanwar and others                          .....Petitioners

                               Versus

State of Uttarakhand and others                  ....Respondents


Present:-
       Mrs. Prabha Naithani, Advocate for the petitioners.
       Mr. Lalit Miglani, A.G.A for the State of Uttarakhand.



                               JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.(Oral)

The challenge in this petition is made to the FIR

No. 44 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504 and 506

IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961

IPC, Police Station Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties through

video conferencing.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would

submit that the case is fully covered by the judgment in

the case of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and another

(2014) 8 SCC 273.

4. It is argued that the petition may be disposed of

with the direction to Investigating Officer that he shall

follow the directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case

of Arnesh Kumar (supra) during the course of the

investigation of the case.

5. In the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra), the Hon'ble

Supreme Court issued various direction with regard to

arrest and remand of an accused. Specific mention is made

to the offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC in the

judgment. Particularly, para 11.1 of the judgment in the

case of Arnesh Kumar (supra) provides as hereunder:-

"11.1. All the State Governments to instruct its police officers not to automatically arrest when a case under Section 498-A IPC is registered but to satisfy themselves about the necessity for arrest under the parameters laid down above flowing from Section 41 CrPC"

6. Even otherwise also, arrest is not a routine and

mechanical act of the IO. The IO is first to satisfy that some

offence is being committed and thereafter, to satisfy that

arrest is required, for further investigation of the matter. In

the cases like instant one, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has

categorically laid down directions in the case of Arnesh

Kumar (supra).

7. This Court has no doubt that the IO shall follow

the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court while

investigating the instant case.

8. With these observations, the writ petition stands

disposed of.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) Vacation Judge 08.02.2022 Nahid