LAWS(UTN)-2014-9-69

LOMESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF UTTARKHAND

Decided On September 10, 2014
Lomesh Kumar Appellant
V/S
State Of Uttarkhand Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Where as it is the submission of learned Counsel for the petitioner Lomesh Kumar that he has regularly been appearing before the Investigating Officer, learned Deputy Advocate General has placed a copy of the report submitted by Inspector In-charge Kotwali, Roorkee, Haridwar, to say that accused Lomesh Kumar has not been appearing before the Investigating Officer. Inspector Incharge Kotwali, Roorkee, Haridwar has stated in such report that accused Lomesh Kumar is not cooperating in the investigation. Thus, on the one hand, there is statement of Lomesh Kumar, who is present in person before the Court, saying that he has been contacting the Investigating Officer, the Inspector In-charge Kotwali, Roorkee, on the other hand, says that the accused is not cooperating in the investigation, despite notice.

(2.) In such a situation, stay vacation application, as also WPCRL No. 663/2014, is disposed of by directing that the petitioner Lomesh Kumar shall 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 shall 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. 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 Cr.P.C. are satisfied.

(3.) So far as the co-accused Vinit Kumar Tomar is concerned, he is the main accused, as per report dated 9.9.2014 of Inspector Incharge Kotwali, Roorkee, Haridwar. He has not been cooperating with the Investigating Agency, despite notice on him. It is the submission of learned Counsel for the petitioner that the police is annoyed with Vinit Kumar Tomar, inasmuch as, his father has filed a complaint against the police officers before National Human Rights Commission. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the applicant is wanted in a criminal case under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 and 120-B, IPC, is the main accused and is not cooperating with the investigation.