HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 229 of 2022

Karan Jindal

…..Petitioner

Versus

State of Uttarakhand and others

.…Respondents

Present:-

Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. V.S. Rathore, A.G.A for the State of Uttarakhand.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J.(Oral)

The challenge in this petition is made to the FIR

No. 0728 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 323, 504 and 506

IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961

IPC, Police Station Kotwali Roorkee, District Haridwar.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the parties through

video conferencing.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner at the very

outset would submit that there are immense chances of

settlement between the parties. Petitioner and petitioner

no. 3 had love marriage, they have also sought protection

from the Court.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit

that the case is fully covered by the judgment in the case

of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and another (2014) 8

SCC 273.

5.

It is argued that the petition may be disposed of

with the direction to Investigating Officer that he shall

follow the directions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case

of Arnesh Kumar (supra) during the course of the

investigation of the case.

6.

In the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra), the Hon’ble

Supreme Court issued various direction with regard to

arrest and remand of an accused. Specific mention is made

to the offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC in the

judgment. Particularly, para 11.1 of the judgment in the

case of Arnesh Kumar (supra) provides as hereunder:-

“11.1. All the State Governments to instruct its police officers not to

automatically arrest when a case under Section 498-A IPC is registered

but to satisfy themselves about the necessity for arrest under the

parameters laid down above flowing from Section 41 CrPC”

7.

Even otherwise also, arrest is not a routine and

mechanical act of the IO. The IO is first to satisfy that some

offence is being committed and thereafter, to satisfy that

arrest is required, for further investigation of the matter. In

the cases like instant one, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has

2

categorically laid down directions in the case of Arnesh

Kumar (supra).

8.

This Court has no doubt that the IO shall follow

the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court while

investigating the instant case.

9.

With these observations, the writ petition stands

disposed of.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.)

Vacation Judge

09.02.2022

Nahid

3