Uttarakhand High Court
Anil Kumar vs State Of Uttarakhand on 15 March, 2012
Author: Prafulla C. Pant
Bench: Prafulla C. Pant
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
NAINITAL
Criminal Writ Petition No. 208 of 2012
with
Stay Application No. 1915 of 2012
1. Anil Kumar
S/o Shri Daya Ram
R/o Ambedkar Nagar
Gali No.5, Jwalapur, Hardwar
presently residing at 1745/8
Ta colony, Pant Nagar
Udham Singh Nagar, Uttarakhand
2. Raj Kumar
S/o Shri Daya Ram
R/o Ambedkar Nagar
Gali No.5, Jwalapur, Hardwar
presently residing at C/o Sri
Surendra Kumar, Narsingh Mandir
Marg, Near PWD Office Upper
Bazar, Joshimath, Chamoli, Uttarkhand
3. Naresh Kumar
S/o Shri Daya Ram
4. Smt. Hero Devi
W/o Shri Daya Ram
5. Daya Ram
S/o Late Prema Singh
All R/o H. No. 270,
Ambedkar Nagar
Gali No.5, Jwalapur, Hardwar
Uttarakhand.
............... Petitioners
Versus
1. State of Uttarakhand,
through Secretary
Ministry of Home Affairs,
2
Uttarakhand, Dehradun
2. Station House Officer,
Police Station Ranipur
Hardwar
3. Smt. Rapti Rani
W/o Anil Kumar
D/o V.R. Nagar Res. Of MIG 62
phase 1 Shivlok Colony
Police Station Ranipur, Hardwar
..............Respondents.
Shri Abhishek Verma, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Shri S.S.Adhikari, A.G.A. present for the State.
Shri B.S.Adhikari, Advocate, present for the respondent no.3 Smt
Rapti Rani
Hon'ble Prafulla C. Pant, J.
Heard.
(2) By means of this writ petition moved under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioners have sought quashing of the First Information Report/ Crime No. 87 of 2012, relating to offences punishable under section 498A and 504 I.P.C., and under section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, registered at Police Station Ranipur, District Hardwar.
(3) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that due to the matrimonial discord between the respondent no.3 and her husband, entire family of the petitioner no.1 (husband) is implicated in the criminal 3 case. It is pleaded that the impugned First Information Report is counter blast to the divorce petition filed by the petitioner no.1. It is also pointed out that petitioner no.2 is brother in law (JETH) who lives in Joshimath. It is further submitted that petitioner no.3 is another brother in law ( DEVAR), petitioner no.4 is mother in law, and petitioner no. 5 is father in law of the complainant. They also lives separately from the petitioner no.1, who works in Pant Nagar and lives in official accommodation. It is further submitted that the complainant used to live with her husband in Pant Nagar. On the other hand learned counsel for the complainant submitted that the complainant was beaten by her husband.
(4) Admit the petition. (5) Learned counsel for the state prays for and is
allowed six weeks' time to file the counter affidavit.
(6) Shri B.S.Adhikari, counsel for the respondent no.3, Smt. Rapti Rani, also prays for and is allowed six weeks' time to file the counter affidavit.
(7) Having considered submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners, and learned counsel for the state, and after going through the papers on 4 record, as an interim measure, it is directed that petitioner no.2 Raj Kumar, petitioner no.3 Naresh Kumar, petitioner no.4 Smt Hero Devi and petitioner no.5 Daya Ram, shall not be arrested in connection with aforesaid Crime No. 87 of 2012, relating to offences punishable under section 498A and 504 I.P.C., and under section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, registered at Police Station Ranipur, District Hardwar, during investigation, provided they cooperate with the investigating agency. As far as the petitioner no.1 Anil Kumar is concerned, it is directed that if he surrenders before the court concerned, his bail application shall be heard and disposed of without unreasonable delay. (Stay Application No. 1915 of 2012 stands disposed of).
(8) List after six weeks.
(Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt.15.03.2012 NP