The judgment emphasizes the need for the Investigating Officer to satisfy specific conditions before making an arrest under Section 41 Cr.P.C.

U.C. Dhyani, J.

By means of present criminal writ petition, the petitioner seeks following reliefs, among others:

(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the first information report dated 31.07.2016 in FIR no. 205 of 2016, under Sections 420, 506 IPC, at police station Kichcha, District Udham Singh Nagar.

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 2 not to arrest and not to harass the petitioner in FIR no. 205 of 2016, under Section 420, 506 IPC at police station Kichcha, District Udham Singh Nagar.

2. An FIR was lodged by respondent no. 3 against the petitioner on 31.07.2016 for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 506 IPC. The relevant portion of said FIR reads as under:

“…I (read informant/reporter) had purchased one plot 30 X 60 ft. in my and my wife Smt. Soni Yadav’s name in Bankhandinath Colony, adjacent to National Highway no. 74, situated at Village Chutki Deveria, P.S. Kichha, District Udham Singh Nagar from Sri Girdhari Lal Sahu @ Pappu Girdhari s/o Ram Swaroop, r/o Jogi Nawada, P.S. Baradari, District Bareilly (petitioner), Satendra Singh Rathore s/o Sri Hari Prasad, r/o Jog Nawada, P.S. Baradari, District Bareilly (U.P.) and Mr. Dev Narayan s/o late Shri Gendan Lal r/o Baba Deep Singh Nagar, near Excise Officer, Rainital Road, Civil Lines, Rampur, P.S. and District Rampur (U.P.) for a total consideration of Rs.5,40,000/-, the registry of which was executed on 07.05.2012 in the office of Registrar, Kichha by Mr. Mahendra Singh Bisht s/o Sri Umed Singh Bisht r/o village Satkhol, Tehsil and District Nainital, original khata holder of the plot, on being asked to do so by the said persons. After the registry, when I (reporter) reached on above plot/land for taking possession of the same, I came to know that it was not the same plot registry of which was done, and keeping me in dark and by misleading me, registry of some other plot was done in my and my wife’s name. Thereafter, I (reporter) informed G.L. Sahu, Satendra Singh Rathore and Dev Narayan over phone that I have been cheated and you people by keeping me in dark registered some other plot in my and my wife’s name, mutation of which has already been done. On this, G.L. Sahu, Satendra Singh Rathore and Dev Narayan told me that we had some dispute with the original khata holder of the land, and due to this reason you have to wait for some days and we will resolve the matter. But, after a lapse of four years, despite my continuous efforts, neither any result has come out nor did the said plot came in my possession. In the name of resolving the dispute and on the pretext of giving possession at the rate of Rs. 400/- per square yard, G.L. Sahu in the presence of his second wife Rekha Arya, who happened to be the MLA of Someshwar and, the then, S.H.O., P.S. Kichha, as also his Advocate, received the total consideration through cheque from me, but despite paying the double amount, the possession of the plot was not handed over to me by the aforementioned persons. Aforementioned land mafias have cheated us and they had also sold the land of the colony allocated for the purpose of park. Now, G.L. Sahu along with his son and nephew Satendra Rathore are threatening us with dire consequences….”.

3. Section 420 IPC speaks about cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property. The same reads as under:

“420. Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.”

4. Section 506 IPC envisages that whoever commits the offence of criminal intimidation shall be punished.

5. On a bare reading of FIR, offences punishable unde