High CourtsSingle Bench

Anis and another vs State of Uttarakhand and others

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 22 May 2012 · Citation: (2012) 05 UK CK 0033

HON’BLE JUDGES
Umesh Chandra Dhyani, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 · Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 147, 148, 323, 324, 452
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Writ Petition No. 433 of 2012

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

12 paragraphs · 679 words

U.C. Dhyani, J.—Heard. By means of the present writ petition, moved under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners Anis and Shamshad have sought quashing of the First Information Report dated 01.05.2012 registered as case crime no. 61 of 2012 relating to offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 452, 324, 504 & 506 IPC at Police Station, Sitarganj, District Udham Singh Nagar.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that brief facts giving rise to the present case are that on 30.04.2012 at 7:00 p.m. the respondent no.3 and his associates namely Naeem s/o Mustaq, Mohad. Ahmad s/o Subhani, Yunus s/o Abdul Kadar and 3 - 4 other persons entered in the house of the petitioner no.1 and caused serious injuries to his brother Mohd. Shakeel and others. Father of petitioner no.1 rushed to Police Station on 30.04.2012 and lodged First Information Report which was registered as Case Crime No. 60 of 2012 on 01.05.2012 at 5:30 p.m.

3.

Mohd. Shakeel immediately hospitalized in Government Hospital Sitarganj on 30.04.2012, Mohd. Shakeel received lacerated wound on the middle of the frontal area of scalp measuring 3.5 cm x 1.0 cm x bone deep and was kept under observation and advised for CT scan of head. He recommended to Sushila Tiwari Government Hospital wherefrom he again referred to Sai Hospital for better treatment. Since then he is under treatment till date.

4.

It is further submitted that it is a case of attempt to murder but the respondent no.2 registered this case only u/s 147, 148, 452, 323, 504 and 506 IPC for ulterior motive. It is also very relevant to mention here that these accused Abdul Kadir and others appeared before the court on 12.05.2012 and on the same day they have been released on bail without any delay.

5.

Respondent no.2 registered a false First Information Report against the petitioners'' family to create a pressure against the petitioners and their family members by dragging them in a false criminal case. The said First Information Report was registered as FIR No. 61 of 2012 under Sections 147, 148, 452, 324, 504 and 506 IPC at Police Station Sitarganj.

6.

Learned counsel also submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they did not commit any offence. They are ready to cooperate with investigation. The petitioners have no previous criminal history.

7.

Mr. S. S. Adhikari, learned AGA opposed the writ petition.

8.

Having considered submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case in which a writ in the nature of certiorari should be issued to quash the FIR dated 01.05.2012 registered as case crime no. 61 relating to offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 452, 324, 504 and 506 IPC at Police Station Sitarganj, District Udham Singh Nagar. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed summarily at the admission stage itself.

9.

Learned counsel for the petitioners made an alternative prayer for directing the Magistrate concerned to dispose of the Bail Application of the petitioners as expeditiously as possible.

10.

The alternate prayer seems to be innocuous, hence the same should be allowed.

11.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that father of petitioner no.1 lodged FIR on 01.05.2012 registered as case crime no. 60 of 2012 against the opposite party no. 3 & others as regards offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 452, 323, 504 & 506 IPC. Accused persons were enlarged on bail on the same day on 12.05.2012 by learned Magistrate (Annexure No. 3 to the writ petition). It is submitted that the present FIR in which the petitioners have been arrayed as accused is counter blast to case crime no. 60 of 2012.

12.

Considering the above submissions, duly supported by documents, it is directed that in case the present petitioners surrender before the Magistrate concerned and move the application for bail, the same shall be disposed of without unreasonable delay after hearing both the sides. Interim Relief Application (CLMA No. 4891 of 2012) also stands disposed of.