Meena Begum vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 1489 UK

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
               NAINITAL
            Criminal Writ Petition No.706 of 2023
Meena Begum                                         ....Petitioner

                              Versus

State of Uttarakhand and Others                  ....Respondents

Present:-
            Mr. Harshpal Sekhon, Advocate for the petitioner.
            Mr. Lalit Miglani, A.G.A. with Ms. Sonika Khulbe, Brief
            Holder for the State.

                           JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.248 of

2023, dated 15.05.2023, under Sections 147, 186, 212, 225,

332, 353, 504, 341 and 342 IPC, Police Station Haldwani,

District Nainital, with related reliefs.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the record.

3. According to the FIR, in a case of kidnapping,

police had visited a premises to question one Tanya, but, it is

the case that the petitioner along with co-accused created

hindrance in the performance of the duties by the police

officers and they tried to rescue one of the apprehended

accused. One of the Constables was also beaten up. The

police party was, in fact, confined in a room. Additional Force

was called. Thereafter, the FIR has been lodged.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit

that there are no averments against the petitioner for the

offence under Section 332 IPC.

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. The FIR is quite in detail as to how the police

reached at the place and how they were stopped from

performing their duties. Role has also been assigned to the

petitioner. What is the credibility of the averments in the FIR?

What offences, if any, have been committed by the petitioner

is a matter, which would find scrutiny during investigation or

trial, as the case may be. At this stage, this Court cannot

draw a conclusion as to which offence is made out against the

petitioner. As stated, 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.

7. The petition is dismissed in limine.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 25.05.2023 Ravi Bisht