Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Uttarakhand High Court

Narendra Singh S/O Sri Thirth Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand on 20 April, 2012

Author: Prafulla C. Pant

Bench: Prafulla C. Pant

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
                      NAINITAL
          Criminal Writ Petition No. 333 of 2012


     Narendra Singh S/o Sri Thirth Singh,
     R/o Village Sitapur, P.S. Jwalapur,
     District-Haridwar.

                                                 .........Petitioner
                            Versus


     1- State of Uttarakhand, through S.S.P. Haridwar.
     2- S.H.O. Police Station, Jwalapur, District Haridwar.
     3- Arun Kishore S/o Late Sriram Kishore,
        R/o Kishore Kunj, Railway Road, P.S. Sadar Bazar,
        Saharanpur (U.P.)

                                                ......Respondents
Mr. Lokpal Singh, Advocate, present for the petitioner.
Mr. S.S. Adhikari, A.G.A., present for the State.

Hon'ble Prafulla C. Pant, J.

Heard.

2) By means of this writ petition moved under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought quashing the First Information Report dated 09.02.2012 registered as Crime no. 50 of 2012, relating to offences punishable under Section 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of I.P.C., at Police Station Jwalapur, District Haridwar.

3) The allegations in the First Information Report are that co-accused Sudesh executed sale deed in the name of the complainant.

4) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is not beneficiary of the sale. It is contended that had the sale being fraudulent, in the mutation proceeding name of the purchaser Sudesh Kumar would not have been recorded. It is also pointed out that after Sudesh Kumar sold the property to Sanjay Chauhan and Satendra Pratap, the complainant himself has compromised the matter with them. In the above circumstances, it is stated that in such matter of property dispute, there was no criminal intention on the part of the petitioner, who was simply the witness of the sale deed.

5) Admit the petition.

6) Learned counsel for the State prays for, and is allowed six weeks' time to file counter affidavit.

7) Issue notice to respondent no. 3 Arun Kishore who may also file his counter affidavit within a period of six weeks.

8) Having considered submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned counsel for the State, as an interim measure, it is directed that the petitioner Narendra Singh shall not be arrested in connection with aforesaid crime no. 50 of 2012 relating to offences punishable u/s 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of I.P.C., registered at Police Station Jwalapur, District-Haridwar, during investigation provided he co-operates with the investigating agency. (Stay application no. 3537 of 2012 stands disposed of).

9)      List after six weeks.


                                    (Prafulla C. Pant, J.)
20.04.2012
mamta