AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
21 paragraphs · 402 wordsRavindra Maithani, J
The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the impugned FIR No. 141 of
2019 dated 17.04.2019 under Sections 147, 307, 353, 332, 504 & 506 I.P.C., Police Station Vikas Nagar, District Dehradun as well as for the stay of
his arrest.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.
According to the FIR, on 15.04.2019, the first informant, a forest personnel, was on patrolling duty with other personnels. He spotted some persons,
on a tractor trolley at about 4.15 P.M. They asked the tractor driver to stop and enquired, as to where, at that hour, he was going. Instead of replying,
the tractor driver tried to crush these forest personnel, abused them and tried to snatch their rifles and also torn away their uniforms. They were about
six in number and armed with weapons. They also tried to assault them, threatened them to life and also successfully ran away from the spot. One of
them was identified as the petitioner Anees.
Learned counsel for he petitioner would argue that this is a false case; FIR is two days delayed; no specific role has been assigned to the petitioner;
no injury was caused; FIR has been lodged after much deliberation, so as to include the ingredients of almost all the offences. It all reveals that it is a
case of false implications.
The writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed for quashing the FIR. What is stated in the FIR discloses the
commission of the cognizable offence. Whatever the arguments have been made may really helpful in evaluating the evidence that may be adduced
during investigation or at the trial, as the case may be. In these proceedings, such examination at this stage is neither desirable nor expedient in the
interest of justice. Therefore, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would urge that direction may be issued so that, in case the petitioner surrenders before the court below, his bail
application may be considered on the same day.
The writ petition is dismissed. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the court concerned and apply for his bail, the same may be disposed of,
as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law.