Vasu Dhiman vs State of Uttarakhand & others

V.K. Bist, J.

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 FIR dated 30.4.2018, being Case Crime No.184 of 2018, under

Section 66 and 67 of I.T. Act, lodged at P.S. Rishikesh, District Dehradun by respondent no.3 against the petitioner (Annexure no.5 to this writ

petition).

ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondent nos.1 & 2 not to arrest the petitioner in connection

with impugned FIR dated 30.4.2018, being Case Crime No.184 of 2018, under Section 66 and 67 of I.T. Act, lodged at P.S. Rishikesh, District

Dehradun by respondent no.3 against the petitioner (Annexure no.5 to this writ petition).â€​

On 30.4.2018, the respondent no.3 lodged an FIR against the petitioner with the allegations that on 21.4.2018, petitioner sent her photographs from

his mobile to her father’s facebook I.D. chat.

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. He submitted that

even if allegation in complaint is taken true, same is not serious, as only photographs were posted.

Learned A.G.A. 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.

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.

In my view, it is for the Investigating Officer to investigate the case and, thereafter, either to file charge sheet or final report in the matter. He will

take statement of the petitioner also and carefully see the facebook I.D. of the father of respondent no.3. 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.

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

before the Courts below and will move bail application and the courts below 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 that petitioner is a young boy, 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 on the

same day in accordance with law.