IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (Crl) No. 249 of 2011 Rajeev Mittal ………..Petitioner. Versus State of Uttarakhand and others ………Respondents. Present: Mr. Manish Arora, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. P.S. Bohara, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. Mr. Ganesh Kandpal, Advocate for respondent no. 3. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.(Oral) Heard Mr. Manish Arora, Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. P.S. Bohara, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand and Mr. Ganesh Kandpal, Advocate for respondent no. 3. Earlier an FIR being Case Crime No. 225 of 2010 was lodged against the petitioner by respondent no. 3, namely, Anju Bansal at Police Station Kankhal, District Haridwar under Section 366 IPC, wherein it was alleged that her daughter has eloped with the petitioner, who is in relation is the uncle of his daughter. The petitioner and the daughter of the complainant had approached this Court by means of a writ petition being Criminal Writ Petition No. 117 of 2011 Rajeev Mittal and another Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others, wherein vide an interim order of this Court dated 23.2.2011 arrest of the petitioner was stayed on the submissions made by the petitioner as well as the daughter of the complainant. This writ petition is still pending before this Court. Now the complainant has lodged a second FIR being Case Crime No. 40 of 2011 under Section 306 read with Section 120-B IPC at Police Station Kankhal, District Haridwar. It has been alleged in the FIR that the 2 complainant had received a telephonic message from her daughter that she is being tortured by the petitioner and the petitioner is taking indecent photographs of her daughter and thereby he is also trying to blackmail her, etc, etc. It has also been alleged in the FIR that due to the aforesaid reasons, the daughter of the complainant, namely, Priyanka has committed suicide. The allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature and therefore, no interference can be made by this Court in any manner at this stage. The writ petition lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 08.4.2011 Rathour 3