Smt. Kiran vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 2031 UK

      HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
                NAINITAL
            Criminal Writ Petition No.1056 of 2023
Smt. Kiran                                             ....Petitioner

                                Versus

State of Uttarakhand and Others                     ....Respondents

Present:-
             Mr. Abhishek Dutt, Advocate for the petitioner.
             Mr. Lalit Miglani, A.G.A. for the State.
             Mr. Siddhartha Sah, Advocate for the respondent no.3.

                              JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.0481 of

2023, under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police

Station Jwalapur, District Haridwar, with related reliefs.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the record.

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

the respondent no.3, Branch Manager, Almora Urban

Cooperative Bank ltd. It was revealed that some forged bank

loans were got sanctioned from the Bank through some Midas

Motors Dealers (Tata Motors), Haridwar. The documents were

produced before the Bank by the co-accused in collusion with

Shakumbhari Automobiles, Haridwar. The FIR records that,

in fact, a loan for Maruti Brezza was sanctioned in the name

of the petitioner, with certain sureties.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit

that no case is made out against the petitioner; she did not

visit the Bank to obtain loan; the petitioner wanted loan on

her property; she had given the documents to Mr. Akash, who

was running a business in the name and style of Kumar

Finances.

5. 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.

6. According to the FIR, the loan for car was

sanctioned to the petitioner through Midas Motors Dealers

(Tata Motors), Haridwar, who was in conspiracy with Midas

Motors Dealers (Tata Motors), Haridwar. It is not disputed

that the loan was sanctioned to the petitioner. What is the

role of the petitioner, it would fall for scrutiny during

investigation or trial, as the case may be. This Court, at this

stage, cannot even infer that no prima facie case is made out

against the petitioner. After all, it is the petitioner, who was

the beneficiary of the loan, which, according to the FIR, was

procured by forgery or manipulation.

7. As stated, the FIR categorically discloses

commission of offences. What is its truthfulness or credibility,

it would fall for scrutiny during investigation or trial, as the

case may be. 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.) 02.08.2023 Ravi Bisht