Manoj Aswal And Others ... vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 430 UK

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
               NAINITAL
            Criminal Writ Petition No.303 of 2023


Manoj Aswal and Others                                  ....Petitioners

                                Versus

State of Uttarakhand and Others                      ....Respondents

Present:-
            Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
            Mr. Pankaj Joshi, Brief Holder for the State.

                              JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The petitioner seeks quashing of the FIR

No.0056 of 2023, dated 30.01.2023, under Sections 498-A,

323 and 506 IPC and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act,

1961, Police Station Kotwali Jwalapur, District- Haridwar

with related reliefs.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the record.

3. According to the FIR, the informant and the

petitioner no.1 were married on 30.01.2022. Thereafter, she

was harassed and tortured for and in connection with the

additional demand of dowry by the petitioners. The FIR is

quite in detail. There are allegations of beating as well.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would

submit that the whole family has been implicated; the

petitioners apprehend their arrest; there are chances of

amicable settlement between the parties.

6. During the course of argument, learned counsel

for the petitioners would refer to Prayer No.III that the police

officers may be directed to comply with the provisions of

Section 41-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("the

Code") before affecting arrest of the petitioners.

7. Learned State Counsel would submit that, in

case of arrest, all the mandatory provisions of law will

definitely be complied with.

8. It is a writ petition, which challenges an FIR. If

an FIR discloses the commission of the offences. Generally,

scrutiny is not made to ascertain the credibility and

truthfulness of the contents of the FIR. It is a matter, which

falls within the domain of investigation.

9. If there are chances of amicable settlement

between the parties, the petitioners may definitely make

attempt to that effect. In fact, that would be a position, which

would be helpful not only to the petitioners, but to the

informant as well. Insofar as chances of arrest is concerned, the

petitioners are very much free to seek anticipatory bail before

the appropriate forum. That may also not be a ground to

quash the FIR. The petitioners have apprehended that they

might be arrested without following the provisions of Section

41-A of the Code. On behalf of the State, a statement is given

that, in case arrest is effected, that would be done only after

following the mandatory provisions of law.

10. In view of what is stated hereinabove, 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.

11. The petition is dismissed in limine.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 20.02.2023 Ravi Bisht