Jagdish Goswami vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 3506 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Jagdish Goswami vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another on 5 December, 2023

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
               NAINITAL
            Criminal Writ Petition No.1619 of 2023
Jagdish Goswami                                        ....Petitioner
                                Versus

State of Uttarakhand and Another                      ....Respondents

Present:-
             Mr. Ajay Singh Bisht, Advocate for the petitioner.
             Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, A.G.A. for the State.
             Mr. Lalit Sharma, Advocate for the respondent no.2

                              JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.01 of

2020, under Sections 420, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and Section

13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of

Corruption Act, 1988 , Police Station Intelligence Sector,

District Dehradun, with related reliefs.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the record.

3. According to the FIR, an open enquiry was

conducted with regard to examination for the post of Gram

Panchayat Adhikari conducted by Uttarakhand Sub Ordinate

Service Selection Commission. It was found that there were a

lot of irregularities committed in the examination. The OMR

sheets were torn; marked. There were various other

irregularities found in the OMR sheets.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit

that petitioner is being called telephonically by someone

introducing himself as a personnel of the Special Task Force.

He would also submit that there is a procedure for calling a

witness during investigation, which has not been followed by

the officers investigating the case.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent no.2 would

submit that the petitioner has been merely called for

interrogation. At present, there is no intention to arrest him.

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 is not based on some mere statement. It

records that in an open enquiry with regard to a public

examination, certain irregularities were found.

8. This matter is under investigation. The

petitioner is not named in the FIR. If the petitioner has

apprehension to arrest, he may very well seek such remedy,

as is permissible under law. But, that may, per se, not be a

ground to quash the FIR. The FIR, in the instant case,

discloses commission of very much serious offences

pertaining to public examination. It definitely requires

thorough investigation. 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.

9. The petition is dismissed in limine.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 05.12.2023 Ravi Bisht