Danish Khan And Others vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others

Ravindra Maithani, J

The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners for quashing FIR 0499 of 2018 dated

21.11.2018 under Section 498-A, 323, 504 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Kotwali, District Dehradun.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

According to the FIR, in the instant case, the first informant and the petitioner no.1 got married on 23.11.2015. In the marriage, gifts were given but

soon after her marriage, the first informant was taunted, harassed and tortured for the demand of additional dowry; a car. The petitioner no.1 had illicit

relationship in the family for that reason also the first informant was harassed. In the FIR, all the details are narrated.

The writ petition has been filed for quashing of the FIR as well. Perusal of the FIR reveals commission of cognizable offence. Who has committed

which, offence is a matter of investigation or at the trial, as the case may be. In these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, these

factual aspects may not be considered. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the present writ petition deserves to be dismissed.

Learned counsel for the petitioners would argue that the petitioners apprehends that they may be arrested in a routine and mechanical manner

without following the guideline of Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and another, (2014) 8 SCC 273.

In the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra), while interpreting and making reference to the various provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973,

pertaining to arrest and production of the accused before the Magistrate, the Hon’ble Court observed as under:-

“11. Our endeavour in this judgment is to ensure that police officers do not arrest the accused unnecessarily and Magistrate do not authorise

detention casually and mechanically………...â€​

Thereafter, from paragraph no. 11.2 to 11.8, Hon’ble Court, in the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra) issued directions to the Police Officers

authorized to make arrest as well as to the Magistrate authorized to order of detention of the accused.

8.. Needless to say, Investigating Officer shall abide by the directions issued in the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra) before effecting arrest of the

petitioners. The Senior Superintendent of Police, District Dehradun shall ensure it.

Accordingly, with the above observations, the writ petition is dismissed.