AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:
“i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned first information report dated 05.5.2017, registered as FIR
No.175 of 2017, under Section 323, 332, 353, 147, 504 & 506 of IPC, Police Station Bazpur, District Udham Singh Nagar.
ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of commanding the respondent no. 2 not to arrest the petitioner in connection with FIR No.175 of 2017,
under Section 323, 332, 353, 147, 504 & 506 of IPC, Police Station Bazpur, District Udham Singh Nagar.â€
On 05.5.2017, respondent no.3 lodged an FIR against the petitioner and others, alleging therein that, on 04.5.2017 in the night, complainant along
with other forest official were on patrolling and an informer furnished information that some persons are carrying wood on motorcycles and on the
said information, the patrolling team reached the alleged spot and they saw light of two motorcycles. It is also alleged that Mangat Singh @ Mangi and
Gurmeet Singh @ Mangi were on motorcycles and the logs of Khair was loaded on the motorcycles, but the said accused persons fled away leaving
the one motorcycle and four logs of Khair. It is further alleged that after some time Mangal Singh @ Mangi, Harjinder Singh @ Banti, Gurmeet Singh
@ Gedi, Maluk Singh along with their associates, namely, Sukhwant Singh @ Sukkhi, Satnam Singh, Nishan Singh and Mangal Singh @ Mamu came
their; abused the forest officials; threatened them of dire consequences and also tried to snatch the rifles.Â
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that allegations made against the petitioner in the impugned F.I.R. are totally false and, therefore,
interim protection should be granted to the petitioner. He submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the instant case.Â
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the writ petition. He submitted that allegations made against the petitioner are serious in nature.Â
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.
From perusal of FIR, I find that 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
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner may be permitted to surrender and courts below 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. It is provided that if petitioner surrenders before the Court concerned and
moves bail application, his bail application shall be considered by the Courts below very very expeditiously, in accordance with law.
Â