At the stage of challenging the FIR, no interference is generally warranted if the cognizable offence is made out, and the Investigating Officer is required to unearth the truth and find out the committed offence.

JUDGMENT

Ravindra Maithani, J. - The challenge in this petition is made to the FIR No.19 of 2023, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, Police Station Nehru Colony, Dehradun, District Dehradun.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. According to the FIR, a secret information was received that various persons are practicing as Medical Officers based on forged documents. Two persons were detected by the Police, they were Preetam Singh and Manish Ali, the co-accused. When they were questioned, it were they, who told it to the Police and Medical Department's Officers that the applicant and one more Imran did provide them the fake medical documents for money. It is the case that the applicant and the co-accused had taken Rs.6,00,000/- to Rs.8,00,000/- from the persons, who provided the fake medical certificates.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that no offence under Section 467 IPC is made out from the perusal of the FIR. He would submit that the Court should make indulgence to that extent.

5. In support of his contention, he relied on the principle of law as laid down in the case of Shriniwas Pandit Dharamadhikari vs. State of Maharrashtra, (1980)4 SCC 551.

6. It is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In case, cognizance offence is made out, generally no interference is warranted. In some cases, FIR may not be recorded under the appropriate Sections, but then, it is not all end of the matter, it is the Investigating Officer, who is required to unearth the truth and find out, as to whether any offence has been committed and, if so, under what Section(s)?

7. The principles of law, as laid down in the case of Shriniwas (supra), by the Hon'ble Supreme Court are in an appeal against conviction. At that stage, definitely the Court would require to find out, as to which offences have been proved by the prosecution. Instant is not such a case, it is the ignition point of judicial process.

8. The FIR categorically reveals that two persons Preetam Singh and Manish Ali, both told it to the law enforcement agency that it is the applicant and the co-accused, who provided the fake medical degree certificates for money. It is a really very serious offence. Undoubtedly, the Investigating Officer, while investigating would collect the material to ascertain, as to which of the offence, if any, has been committed by the petitioner. Therefore, this Court is of the view that at this stage, there is no reason to make any interference in this petition. Accordingly, the petition deserves to be dismissed.

9. The petition is dismissed in limine.