Pranjal Srivastava vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 904 UK

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
               NAINITAL
            Criminal Writ Petition No.454 of 2023
Pranjal Srivastava                                  ....Petitioner

                               Versus

State of Uttarakhand and Others                   ....Respondents

Present:-
            Mr. Nivesh Bahuguna, Advocate for the petitioner.
            Mr. Lalit Miglani, A.G.A. with Ms. Sonika Khulbe, Brief
            Holder for the State.

                           JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

By means of the instant petition, the petitioner

seeks the following reliefs:

(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the

nature of mandamus to direct the

respondents to cause a fair investigation

be made in the FIR no.0044/2023 under

Section 147, 148, 323, 324, 325, 326,

504 and 506 IPC dated 09.03.2023 filed

by the petitioner and to cause the arrest

of the accused persons be made at the

earliest.

(ii) Issue any other writ, order or direction,

which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit

and proper in the circumstances of the

case.;

(iii) Award the cost of the writ petition in

favour of the petitioner.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the record.

3. The FIR in the instant case was lodged on

09.03.2023 with regard to an incident, which took place on

14.01.2023. According to the FIR, on 14.01.2023, the

informant was attacked by the named persons in the FIR.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit

that, in fact, the incident took place in the house of the friend

of the petitioner, who happens to be a lawyer. An FIR against

the friend of the petitioner was lodged under Section 307 IPC

and under other offences on the same date and the FIR in the

instant case was lodged after indulgence of the court under

Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("the

Code") on 09.03.2023.

5. The Court fails to understand as to how the

petitioner could say that the investigation is not fair. Why this

Court should assume that investigation is not fair, therefore,

some directions may be issued? There is no material to

substantiate the prayer, as sought by the petitioner. The

second prayer, which the petitioner sought is that the

accused be arrested. This is something, which cannot even be

asked for. Arrest or not to arrest, it is a discretion of the

Investigating Officer, which is purely guided by the settled

principles of law, as incorporated under Sections 41 and 41-A

of the Code, as well as the various directions, which have

been issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a catena of

decisions.

6. Having considered, this Court is of the view that

the instant petition has no force and it deserves to be

dismissed at the stage of admission itself.

7. The petition is dismissed in limine.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 01.04.2023 Ravi Bisht