WPCRL/61/2025
2025 Latest Caselaw 2133 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

WPCRL/61/2025 on 19 February, 2025

Author: Rakesh Thapliyal

Bench: Rakesh Thapliyal

                                                                                2025:UHC:1197
                Office N ot e s,
              r e por t s, or de r s
              or pr oce e dings
SL.
       Date     or dir e ct ions                      COURT'S OR JUD GE'S ORD ERS
N o.
              a nd Re gist r a r 's
                  or de r w it h
                  Signa t ur e s
                                       WPCRL No. 61 of 2025

                                       Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.

1. Mr. Rajat Mittal, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the State.

3. Mr. D.P. Mittal, learned counsel holding the brief of Mr. Ankur Sharma, learned counsel for the caveator.

4. By the instant petition the petitioner is praying for quashing of the FIR dated 01.02.2025 bearing Case Crime No. 0037 of 2025, wherein, the present petitioner has been implicated for the offence punishable under Section 308(2), 351(3) and 352 of B.N.S., 2023, P.S. Vikasnagar, District Dehradun.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated and all the offence as alleged are punishable for less than 7 years and therefore he is entitled to get the benefit of the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar.

6. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. on written instructions informed to this court that the present petitioner have a criminal history of about five cases including the present one. Apart from this Mr. V.S. Pal submits that the FIR cannot be quashed since prima facie from the contents of FIR cognizable offence are made out.

7. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. further submits that since, the petitioner have a criminal history, therefore, at this juncture no relief can be granted.

8. Apart from this, learned A.G.A. Mr. V.S. Pal informed to this court that the investigation is still going on and if any interim protection is granted to the petitioner particularly when the petitioner have the criminal history then there are all possibilities that he will frustrate the 2025:UHC:1197 investigation.

9. After taking into consideration that the petitioner have a criminal history and the investigation is still going on and if at this stage an interim protection is granted it amounts to interference with the investigation.

10. Accordingly, I do not find any merit in the writ petition. The same is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 19.02.2025 PR 2025:UHC:1197