DIMPLE ALIAS KULDEEP SINGH vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS

This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:

“i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, calling for the records and quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 30.04.2018 lodged by

the respondent no. 3 on the basis of which, F.I.R. No. 117 of 2018, under Section 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 324 and 325 of I.P.C. was registered at

Police Station Nanakmatta, District Udham Singh Nagar.

ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, commanding the respondent no. 1 and 2 not to harass and arrest the petitioner in view of

the impugned F.I.R. till the collection of any credible evidence against the petitioner or till the filing of the report under Section 173 of Cr.P.C.â€​

Allegation against the petitioner in the F.I.R. lodged by the respondent no.3 (complainant) is that, on 28.04.2018, when the son of the complainant

was having the food, a call came on the phone of his son and his son was asked by the caller to come outside his house. It is stated that when his

son went outside his house, petitioner alongwith other accused persons caught his son and gave a blow through a sword on his son, due to which his

son sustained injuries. When hue and cry was made, the accused persons fled away from the spot.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that allegations made against the petitioner in the impugned F.I.R. are totally false and, therefore,

protection should be granted to the petitioner. He submitted that main allegation of assaulting is against Rajveer Singh. He submitted that the

petitioner is a young boy of 21 years and in case, he is sent to jail, his entire career will be ruined.Â

Learned Assistant Government Advocate vehemently opposed the writ petition. He submitted that allegations made against the petitioner are

serious in nature. Therefore, interim relief should not be granted to the petitioner and the writ petition filed by him deserves to be dismissed at the

threshold. Â

I have considered the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the papers available on record. Â

The Hon’ble Apex Court, in the case of State of West Bengal. Vs. Swapna Kumar, 1982 (1) SCC 561, has held that if an offence is disclosed,

Court will not normally interfere with the investigation into the case, and will permit investigation into the offence alleged to be completed. If the FIR,

prima facie, discloses the commission of an offence, the Court does not normally stop the investigation, for, to do so would be to trench upon the

lawful power of the police to investigate into cognizable offences.

I have considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties and gone through the contents of F.I.R. Contents of F.I.R. disclose offence

and it is for the Investigating Officer to investigate the case and, thereafter, either to file charge sheet or final report in the matter. It is not a fit

case, where the High Court should interfere in this criminal writ petition moved under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Consequently, the

writ petition is dismissed. Â

Stay application (CLMA No.6591 of 2018) stands rejected. Â

Learned counsel for the petitioner then submitted that in case offence is made out against the petitioner, in that event, the petitioner will surrender

before the Court concerned and will move the bail application and the Court concerned may be directed to decide his bail application same day. In

my view, every bail application should be considered and decided by the learned Court below without any unreasonable delay; but, needless to say that

it should be decided strictly in accordance with law. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, it is directed that in case

petitioner surrenders and moves bail application, the same shall be decided by the concerned Court expeditiously, preferably on the same day, in

accordance with law.