Sukhdev vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 2313 UK

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

       Criminal Writ Petition No.1154 of 2023
Sukhdev                                     .......Petitioner

                           Versus

State of Uttarakhand and others        ........Respondents
Present:-
            Mr. M.S. Pal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr.
            Vikramaditya Shah, Advocate for the petitioner.
            Mr. Lalit Miglani, A.G.A. with Ms. Sangeeta
            Bhardwaj, Brief Holder for the State/respondent
            nos.1 to 5.
            Mr. Lalit Sharma, Advocate for respondent no.6



                        JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The petitioner seeks directions that an FIR No.

44 of 2023, dated 20.05.2023, under Section 302 IPC,

Police Station Chorgaliya, District Naintial, lodged by him

may be investigated by Central Bureau of Investigation

and a High Level Judicial Inquiry may also be conducted

in the matter.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the record.

3. An FIR has been filed by the petitioner with the

averments that on 15.04.2023, at 08:00 in the morning,

his son had gone out from the house along with his

friends. Subsequently, his dead body was found.

Suspicion was raised that perhaps she has been killed.

4. Learned State counsel was required to get

instructions in the matter.

5. Today, learned State counsel, under

instruction, would submit that the investigation is already

pending under Section 304-A IPC. It is submitted that

initially, the FIR was lodged under Section 302 IPC, but

the Investigating Officer did not find any evidence to

substantiate Section 302 IPC, therefore, the investigation

is underway for the offence under Section 304-A IPC.

6. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the

petitioner would submit that it is a case under Section

302 IPC.

7. The FIR in the instant case was lodged on

20.05.2023. The investigation is underway. It is not a

case of any in-action; even according to the FIR, it is not a

case of eye-witness account of the petitioner. At this

stage, this Court should not discuss the merits any more.

The Investigating Officer may after conclusion of the

investigation shall submit a police report, which may then

be considered by the court.

8. Having considered, this Court does not see any

reason to intervene in the matter, which is under

investigation. This Court does not see any reason to

transfer the investigation or to get the investigation

monitored by any Committee. No interference is

warranted at this stage. Accordingly, the petition deserves

to be dismissed at the state of admission itself.

9. The petition is dismissed in limine.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 18.08.2023 Sanjay