Vineet Kumar vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 3398 UK

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
               NAINITAL
            Criminal Writ Petition No.1549 of 2023
Vineet Kumar                                           ....Petitioner
                                Versus

State of Uttarakhand and Others                      ....Respondents

Present:-
             Mr. Abhishek Verma, Advocate for the petitioner.
             Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, A.G.A. for the State.

                             JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.248 of

2023, under Section 354 A IPC, Police Station Dalanwala,

District Dehradun, with related reliefs.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the record.

3. According to the FIR, pm 24.10.2023, when the

informant, who is the respondent no.3, had gone to see her

Dusshera festival, the petitioner molested her in a manner,

which was unbearable to the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit

that the informant is tenant in the property of the petitioner;

she is not ready to leave the tenancy. On 24.10.2023, the

petitioner was beaten up by the family members of the victim

in the Dusshera festival.

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. Learned counsel for the petitioner has invited

the attention of the Court to Annexure No.2, a communication

made by the father of the petitioner to the police revealing

therein that on 24.10.2023, when the petitioner had gone to

see the Dusshera festival, he was beaten up by the family

members of the informant.

7. Does it mean that the incident took place on

24.10.2023, on the Dusshera festival? Does it mean that the

petitioner molested the informant, and, thereafter, some more

incidents took place, of which a report was given by the father

of the petitioner? These all would fall for scrutiny during

investigation or trial, as the case may be.

8. The FIR definitely discloses commission of

offence. 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.

10. Insofar as the apprehension of arrest is

concerned, , it is not a routine or mechanical exercise to be

undertaken by the Investigation Officer. First and foremost,

he has to ascertain the complicity of a person in the offence,

and, thereafter, he should further examine the necessity to

arrest. There are various statutory provisions as well as

guidelines from the Higher Courts, which, this Court has no

doubt, the Investigation Officer of the instant case shall

definitely follow.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 08.11.2023 Ravi Bisht