Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 6285 (UTT)

RAJESH NEGI v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/898/2021 · 2025-01-10

Manoj Kumar Tiwari

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:511 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPCRL No.898 of 2021 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. There is no representation for the petitioners. Mr. K.S. Bora, Deputy Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand. 2. Petitioner has sought quashing of F.I.R. No.0106 of 2021 registered against him for offence punishable under Section 306 I.P.C. registered in Police Station Kotwali Kotdwara, District Pauri Garhwal. 3. Learned State Counsel submits that, upon investigation, charge sheet has been filed against the petitioner. Thus, it is contended that writ petition has become infructuous. The said contention, however, cannot be accepted. Mere filing of charge sheet will not render the writ petition infructuous. 4. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra & others, reported in AIR 2021 SC 1918, have laid down parameters for exercise of power under Article 226 of Constitution, in such matters. 5. The impugned F.I.R. is on record as Annexure No.1 to the writ petition. Perusal of the F.I.R. reveals that ingredients of offences levelled against the petitioner are made out. 6. Whether the allegations are true or untrue, would have to be decided in the 2025:UHC:511 trial. While exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution, this Court is not expected to embark upon an enquiry into, whether there is reliable evidence or not. It is not a case where FIR does not, disclose any offence. None of the parameters laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court, for invoking power under Article 226 of the Constitution for quashing an FIR, are met in the present case. 7. In such view of the matter, there is no scope for interference with the impugned FIR while exercising extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition fails and is dismissed. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 10.01.2025 Arpan ARPAN JAISWAL Digitally signed by ARPAN JAISWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eabb68a3895e41937c266c23964c0 485365445e3a20dddb7393398f9fe45ba3e, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=060FC17022BEAE3DE215D68 D9D454C5109CB987446351E4DF04AADAA2 C2CEA66, cn=ARPAN JAISWAL Date: 2025.01.13 11:00:20 +05'30' 2025:UHC:511