High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 03 UK CK 0064

SIMRANJEET SINGH ALIAS HAPPY vs SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE U.S. NAGAR AND OTHER

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 22 March 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
V.K. BIST, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 307 of 2018

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

25 paragraphs · 535 words
1.

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

“Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the FIR No.15 of 2018, dated 16.1.2018, under Section 420 of IPC,

registered at P.S. Kunda, District-Udham Singh Nagar against the present petitioner.â€​

2.

On 16.1.2018, the respondent no. 3 lodged an F.I.R. against the petitioner and another alleging therein that, on 10.12.2016, the brother of the

complainant expired. It is stated that, on the pretext of providing financial help of Rs.35,000/- to the complainant from the Jaspur Block, the petitioner

and another took certain documents of his deceased brother from the petitioner. It is stated that, on the basis of those documents, the petitioner and

another tried to make a forged insurance of his deceased brother.Â

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the complainant has come to know that present petitioner had no role in the impugned case,

therefore, he 2 is only compounding the impugned FIR with respect to present petitioner and not against Harkesh (who is in jail). Â

4.

Short counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Investigating Officer, in which he has stated that the petitioner with other co-accused persons

is running racket, wherein the dead persons are being insured and huge public money is being misappropriated by cheating various insurance

companies. It is also stated that the petitioner has a long criminal history and he is already involved in similar nature of cases and considering this is a

case under Section 2/3 of Gangster Act has also been registered against the him and the petitioner is absconding. Â

5.

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

6.

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.

7.

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

8.

Since it is the case of police, that there is a racket in Jaspur area, wherein, the dead persons are being insured and huge public money is being

misappropriated by cheating various insurance companies. A copy of the order be sent to the S.S.P., Udham Singh Nagar, he will look into the matter

and he will do the needful, so that innocent persons may not be cheated.Â