Nandini Vats vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others

Ravindra Maithani, J

The instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed for quashing the F.I.R No.219 of 2019, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 504 & 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Jwalapur, District Haridwar and also for stay of arrest.

Heard and perused the records.

The FIR was lodged on 25.04.2019. According to it, the co-accused under a conspiracy assured the first informant that he would be provided tender for supplying articles in Government Department and thereby the first informant was induced to invest money, which he delivered. The petitioner is wife of one of the co-accused, she was also introduced to the first informant and it is the petitioner who, according to the F.I.R., received some of the amount from the first informant. The first informant was shown certain documents to make him believe that in fact, the petitioner and co-accused can award the tender. After a while the first informant realized that he has been cheated. When he questioned, the co-accused threatened him to life.

According the F.I.R., the first informant has been dishonestly induced to deliver Rs.47 lakhs to the petitioner and co-accused.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would argue that petitioner is not at all instrumental in any of the transaction; she has not conspired in any manner inducing the first informant to deliver money; she is a woman having two minor daughters and, therefore, she may not be arrested during investigation.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first informant would argue that petitioner has received the money from the first informant.

In the FIR, it is stated that the petitioner was introduced to the first informant. She has also received money from the first informant. What is her role is a matter for investigation or at trial, as the case may be. Perusal of FIR reveals commission of cognizable offence. In these proceedings scrutiny of the material cannot be meticulously done. Therefore, this Court is of the view that there is no reason to quash the F.I.R and the petition deserves to be dismissed.

The writ petition is dismissed. However, the Investigating Officer if decides to arrest the petitioner shall follow the law as laid down by the Courts, in this regard as well as the legal provisions and will remind himself that liberty is a precious right which should not be curtailed in a routine manner.