WPCRL/1190/2016 of Sompal Singh Vs State Of Uttarakhand AND OTHERS

WPCRL No. 1190 of 2016 U.C.Dhyani, J.

Mr. Shashikant Shandilya and Mr. Mohd.

Azim, Advocates, present for the writ petitioner.

Mr. A. S. Gill, learned Deputy Advocate

General, assisted by Mr. Milind Raj, Mr. V. S. Rathour, Mr. Rakesh Kunwar, Ms. Farida Siddiqui and Mr. V. S. Mahra, Brief Holders, present for the State/respondents.

An FIR has been lodged against the petitioner

registered as Case Crime No. 266 of 2016, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 504 and 506 of IPC, at Police Station Patel Nagar, Roorkee, District Dehradun.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner learned counsel for the State and perused the documents brought on record.

In view of the judgment rendered by

Hon’ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and another, 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.

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.

Petitioner is directed to contact the Investigating Officer of the case on 14.09.2016, and on such subsequent dates as may be instructed by him (I.O.) for interrogation and investigation. 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.

The writ petition of the present petitioner is being decided in the same manner as WPCRL No. 1051 of 2016 was decided by this Court.

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.

In the given facts and circumstances of the present writ petition, this Court does not feel it necessary to issue 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.)

06.09.2016

Kaushal