Neeraj Pandey vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 706 UK

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
               NAINITAL
            Criminal Writ Petition No.433 of 2023

Neeraj Pandey                                         ....Petitioner

                               Versus

State of Uttarakhand and Others                    ....Respondents

Present:-
            Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey, Advocate for the petitioner.
            Mr. V.S. Rathore, A.G.A. for the State.

                            JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.75 of

2023, dated 08.03.2023, under Sections 323, 506 IPC, Police

Station Mukhani, District Nainital, with related reliefs.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the record.

3. According to the FIR, on 08.03.2023, at 02:30

PM, the petitioner assaulted, pelted stones on the informant

and threatened her to life. He also beaten up the husband of

the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit

that, in fact, with regard to the same incident, a complaint

given by the petitioner has not been lodged as an FIR, and an

application of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("the

Code"), is to be filed very soon.

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. In the instant case, there are allegations that the

petitioner pelted stones, and attacked the informant and her

family members. It is admitted during the course of argument

that an incident took place, but the petitioner has a different

version. According to the petitioner, his FIR could not be

lodged. Now they are contemplating to file an application

under Section 156(3) of the Code.

7. Whether the FIR in the instant case is genuine,

true or not, it is a matter for scrutiny during investigation or

the trial, as the case may be. The FIR discloses commission of

offences. 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.) 20.03.2023 Ravi Bisht