Amrik Singh And Another ... vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 903 UK

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
               NAINITAL
            Criminal Writ Petition No.469 of 2023
Amrik Singh and Another                                ....Petitioners

                               Versus

State of Uttarakhand and Others                     ....Respondents

Present:-
            Mr. Harshpal Sekhon, Advocate for the petitioners.
            Mr. Lalit Miglani, A.G.A. with Mr. P.S.Uniyal, Brief Holder
            for the State.

                            JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The petitioners seeks quashing of FIR No.41 of

2023, dated 01.02.2023, under Sections 147, 323, 452, 325,

504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Kunda, District Udham Singh

Nagar, with related reliefs.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the record. Learned counsel for the petitioners

appeared through video conferencing.

3. The FIR in the instant case has been lodged by

the respondent no.4, the informant. According to it, on

30.1.2023, one Happy Kahlo and 3-4 other persons attacked

the informant. He had fracture also.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would

submit that the case is covered by the directions given by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State

of Bihar and Another, (2014) 8 SCC 273. It is also submitted

that the directions may be issued to the court below to decide

the bail application expeditiously.

5. The instant petition is for the quashing of the

FIR. The petitioners have been fair enough. In Para 5 of the

writ petition, it is incorporated that the investigation is now

pending under Sections 452 and 325 IPC also. If the case is

covered by the judgment in the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra),

definitely the Investigating Officer or the Magistrate, at the

time of remand, would take into consideration the directions

given, therein. In so far as the bail is concerned, there have

been directions issued in a catena of decisions, particularly,

recently, in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. Central

Bureau of Investigation and another, 2021 SCC OnLine SC

922.

6. It is a writ petition under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India. In case, the FIR discloses commission of

offence, generally, no interference is warranted unless there

are compelling circumstances to do so.

7. The FIR, in the instant case, discloses the

commission of cognizable offence. Therefore, this Court is of

the view that there is no reason to make any interference.

Accordingly, the petition deserves to be dismissed at the stage

of admission itself.

8. The petition is dismissed in limine.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 01.04.2023 Ravi Bisht