WPCRL/888/2016 of Anuj Kumar AND ANOTHER Vs State Of Uttarakhand AND OTHERS

WPCRL No. 888 of 2016

U.C.Dhyani, J.

Mr. Mohd. Alauddin, Advocate, present for

the writ petitioners.

Mr. A. S. Gill, learned Deputy Advocate

General, assisted by Mr. H. S. Rawal, AGA and Mr. S.S.Adhikari & V.S.Rathour, Brief Holders, present for the State/respondents no.1 & 2.

By means of present writ petition, the

petitioners seek to quash the Case Crime No.168 of 2016, under Sections 452, 427, 323, 504, 326, & 506 of IPC, P.S. Kotwali Laksar, District Haridwar.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners

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

Learned Deputy Advocate General submitted that Section 326 IPC has been converted into Section 325 IPC.

It is the submission of learned counsel for

the petitioners that the petitioners are entitled to

be given the benefit of Arnesh Kumar vs. State

of Bihar and another, reported in (2014) 8

.Supreme Court Cases 273

In view of the judgment rendered by

Hon’ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar(supra), the petitioners should be arrested only when the Investigating Officer has reason to believe, on the basis of information and material collected, that they have 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 dixitof the Police Officer. In other words, the petitioners 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 petitioners.

Petitioners are directed to contact the Investigating Officer of the case on 29.07.2016, and on such subsequent dates as may be instructed by him (I.O.) for interrogation and investigation.

The Criminal Writ Petition is summarily disposed of with the direction as above.

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.)

22.07.2016

Kaushal