Uttarakhand High Court
Liyakat Ali vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 22 April, 2017
Author: U.C. Dhyani
Bench: U.C. Dhyani
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
NAINITAL
Criminal Writ Petition No. 578 of 2017
Liyakat Ali ..............Petitioner
versus
State of Uttarakhand and others .......... Respondents
Mr. Rajat Mittal, Advocate, present for the writ petitioner.
Mr. H.O.Bhakuni, learned AGA, present for the State/respondents no. 1 & 2.
U.C. Dhyani, J. (Oral)
By means of present writ petition, the petitioner prays for the following relief, among others:
"(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned FIR dated 15.04.2017 in case crime no. 95 of 2017, under Sections 420 & 506 IPC, PS Prem Nagar, District Dehradun (Annexure no1), lodged by respondent no.1.
(b). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents no. 1 & 2 not to harass and arrest the petitioner in view of the impugned FIR till the collection of any credible evidence against the petitioner."
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State, perused the documents brought on record and considered the grounds taken up in the writ petition.
3. In view of the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and another, 2 reported in (2014) 8 Supreme Court Cases 273, the petitioner should be arrested only when the Investigating Officer has reason to believe, on the basis of information and material collected, that he has committed an offence. Before making arrest, the Investigating Officer is required to satisfy himself that the arrest is necessary for one or more purposes envisaged by Sub-Clauses (a) to (e) of Clause (1) of Section 41 of Cr.P.C. It will not be based upon the ipse dixit of the Police Officer. In other words, the petitioner shall be arrested only when the conditions stipulated in Sub-Clauses (a) to (e) of Clause (1) of Section 41 of Cr.P.C. are satisfied.
5. Needless to say that the Investigating Officer of the case shall abide by the aforesaid directions of Hon'ble Apex Court, before affecting the arrest of the petitioner.
6. Petitioner is directed to contact the Investigating Officer of the case on 29.04.2017, and on such subsequent dates as may be instructed by him (I.O.) for interrogation and investigation.
7. When the investigation of the case will be conducted, it will either culminate into filing of the charge-sheet or submission of final report. This Court has no occasion to interfere in the investigation in between.
8. Therefore, it will be of no use keeping the present criminal writ petition pending. Criminal Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of at the admission stage itself, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, who are present.
9. In the given facts and circumstances of the present writ petition, this Court does not feel it necessary to issue 3 notice to the private respondent. Still, liberty is granted to him to move for recall of this Order, if he feels aggrieved with the same.
(U.C. Dhyani, J.) 22.04.2017 Kaushal 4