AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ravindra Maithani, J
The challenge in this petition is made to FIR/Case Crime No.167 of 2023, dated 05.09.2023, under Sections 380, 409, 417, 418, 420 IPC, Police Station Pant Nagar, District Udham Singh Nagar.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
The Excise Department has ceased a tractor while smuggling liquor. The tractor was parked in the office premise of the Excise Department. On the next day, the respondent no.3, one of the employees of the Excise Department lodged a report that it is the petitioner, who brought two persons in the office premise and took the informant with him, without permitting him to lock the premises. The two companions of the petitioner remained in the premises. After his return, the informant had realized that, in fact, the tractor has been replaced.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that nothing was entrusted to the petitioner; the petitioner did not commit any offence; in the CCTV footages, there were two stranger persons, who took the tractor.
This is writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. If FIR discloses commission of offences, generally no interference is warranted unless there are compelling circumstances to do so.
The allegations in the FIR, is quite serious, according to which, under a conspiracy, it is the petitioner, who facilitated the removal of the tractor from the premises of the Excise Department.
What is the precise role of the petitioner it will fall for scrutiny during investigation or trial, as the case may be. At this stage, this Court cannot make any comment on it. Therefore, this Court does not see any reason to make any interference in this petition. Accordingly, the petition deserves to be dismissed at the stage of admission itself.
The petition is dismissed in limine.