GAJENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought quashing of F.I.R. dtd. 25/5/2019, F.I.R. No. 0178 of 2019, under Ss. 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Haldwani, District Nainital. Further prayer has been made for a direction to the respondent no. 2 not to arrest the petitioner with regard to the aforesaid F.I.R.

(2.) Learned Brief Holder appearing for the State submits that as per the counter affidavit, petitioner has a criminal history of same nature. He further submits that petitioner is not cooperating in the investigation.

(3.) I have considered the submission advanced by learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the contents of the F.I.R. Contents of F.I.R. prima facie disclose commission of offence. In my opinion, it is not a fit case where the Court should interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is for the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter and thereafter to file either the charge sheet or final report in the matter. The Hon'ble Apex Court, in the case of State of West Bengal v. Swapna Kumar, (1982) 1 SCC 561, has held that if an offence is disclosed, Court will not normally interfere with the investigation into the case, and will permit investigation into the offence alleged to be completed. If the FIR, prima facie, discloses the commission of an offence, the Court does not normally stop the investigation, for, to do so would be to trench upon the lawful power of the police to investigate into cognizable offences. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed.