Razia Begum & another. vs State of Uttarakhand & others.

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

"i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 12.09.2016, registered as F.I.R. No. 72 of 2016, under Section 306 I.P.C., P.S. Bageshwar.

ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to arrest the petitioners in F.I.R. No. 72 of 2016, under Section 306 I.P.C., P.S. Bageshwar, District Bageshwar till the pendency of present petiton."

Allegation against the petitioners in the F.I.R. lodged by the respondent no.3 (complainant) is that, on 12.09.2016 when till 07:00 a.m., his younger brother Raj Kumar did not woke up, the complainant and his another brother opened the door forcefully. Thereafter, he saw that his younger brother Raj Kumar had committed suicide by hanging himself. The police was called and the police recovered suicide note. It is stated in the F.I.R. that the deceased committed suicide due to torture and harassment caused by Kavi Joshi (Patwari), Aarzoo Ansari (daughter of petitioner no. 1), Rudra Singh Dhami, Monu

and others, inasmuch as, on some occasions, altercation took place between the deceased and these persons. It is further stated that Aarzoo Ansari used to threat the brother of the complainant for vacating the house and also threatened him of dire consequence. As a result thereof, he committed suicide.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the allegations made against the petitioners in the impugned F.I.R. are totally false and, therefore, protection should be granted to the petitioners. He also submitted that direction may be issued to the concerned Investigating Officer to comply the provision of Section 41 Cr.P.C.

Learned Deputy Advocate General vehemently opposed the writ petition. He submitted that allegation made against the petitioners is serious in nature. Therefore, interim relief should not be granted to the petitioners and the writ petition filed by them deserves to be dismissed at the threshold. He submitted that though the petitioners are not named in the F.I.R.; but, in the suicide note their names figured. He also submitted that in case some credible evidence is found against the petitioners, in that event, before taking further action, the Investigating Officer will comply the provision of Section 41 Cr.P.C. and will give notices to the petitioners.

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

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.

Stay application (CLMA No.11459 of 2017) stands rejected.

Learned counsel for the petitioners then submitted that in case offence is made out against the petitioners, in that event, the petitioners will surrender before the Court concerned and will move the bail applications and the Court concerned may be directed to decide their bail applications same day. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners, it is directed that in case petitioners surrender and move bail applications, the same shall be decided by the concerned

Court expeditiously, preferably on the same day, in accordance with law.