1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Writ Petition No. 125 of 2011 With CLMA No. 1229 of 2011 1. Mahavir S/o Shri Faggan 2. Pravesh S/o Shri Mahavir 3. Minakshi W/o Shri Pravesh All petitioners are R/o Village Salempur Rajputana Kotwali Gangnahar, District Haridwar ………………. Petitioners Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand, through Home Secretary, Secretariat, Haridwar 2. Station House Officer, Police Station Gangnahar Dist Haridwar 3. Sanjay Kumar S/o Shri Mahendra R/o Village Hakimpur Turra Police Station Bhagwanpur Tehsil, Roorkee, Dist Haridwar ………..Respondents. Shri C.K.Sharma, Advocate present for the petitioners Shri G.S.Sandhu, G.A, present for the state Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard. 2 (2) By means of this writ petition, moved under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioners have sought quashing of the First Information Report dated 11.02.2011, registered as Crime No. 52 of 2011, relating to offence punishable under section 302 I.P.C., at Police Station Gangnahar, District Haridwar. (3) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the marriage of the petitioner no.1 (Mahavir) with the deceased was 30 years old. It is pointed out that petitioner no.2 (Pravesh) is son of the deceased and petitioner no.3 (Minakshi) is daughter in law of the deceased. It is argued that in order to grab the property of the petitioners the First Information Report has been lodged by the nephew of the deceased. (4) It is quite possible that petitioners might be innocent, but the allegation in the First Information Report is that the deceased (Smt Kaushal) was murdered in the intervening night 31.01.2011/ 1.02.2011, and the deceased appears to have died of burn injuries. (5) In the above circumstances, without expressing any opinion as to final merits of the case, this court is 3 of the view that it is not a fit case for interference with investigation of the case. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed summarily, with the observation that if the petitioners Mahavir, Pravesh and Minakshi surrender before the court concerned, their bail application shall be heard and disposed of without unreasonable delay. (Stay Application No. 1229 of 2011 also stands disposed of). (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt.25.02.2011 NP