IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Writ Petition No. 1141/2009 Swami Shanti Dharmanand Saraswati & Ors. …….Petitioners Versus State of Uttarakhand & Ors. …….Respondents Mr. Anurag Bisaria, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Prabhakar Joshi, Brief Holder for the State/respondents no. 1 & 2. June 28, 2010 Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. This writ petition has been filed seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the FIR of Case Crime No. 155/2009 under Section 323, 380, 384, 452, 454 & 506 IPC, PS Raiwala, Rishikesh, District Dehradun. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. In brief, the prosecution case is that respondent no. 3 Dr. Satish Chandra lodged a report with PS Raiwala with the averments that he was residing in Gyan Ganga Trust Gohri Mafi, Raiwala. He went to California (America) in connection with some work and, therefore, he had kept Vachan Singh to look after his house. On 11.12.2009 at about 2 pm, when the complainant and his wife Gauri Chandra came at their aforesaid residence, they saw that petitioners had broke open the lock of the door of his residence and they were stealing his household belongings with the help of labourers. When the complainant tried to stop them, they committed marpit with him as well as his wife in which the complainant received injuries in his hand and face. Petitioners had stolen TV, fridge, microwave oven, dining table, bed, OR Machine, Rs. 3500/- cash, some gold ornaments and other valuable things from his house. The petitioners further threatened that if any report would be lodged against them with the police, they would kill the complainant and further said that if the complainant wanted to visit the said Ashram, he would have to pay rupees ten lakhs for it. The complainant and his wife were rescued by Ramchandra and Pyarelal (driver). With these averments, FIR was lodged on 23.12.2009 at 2.45 pm. The State has filed counter affidavit sworn in by SI Om Prakash Arya, the I.O. of the case wherein the averments made in the FIR have been supported. Copies of the medical report of the complainant and his wife have been annexed with the counter affidavit, which reveal that they were examined on 11.12.2009 i.e. on the alleged date of incident. Copies of the statements of complainant Dr. Satish Chandra, his wife Gauri Chandra and the eyewitnesses Pyarelal (driver) and Ramchandra recorded under Section 161 CrPC have also been annexed with the counter affidavit. In their aforesaid statements, they have supported the version made in the FIR. Thus, averments made in the FIR are corroborated by the statements of the complainant Dr. Satish Chandra, his wife Gauri Chandra and the eyewitnesses Pyarelal (driver) and Ramchandra recorded under Section 161 CrPC. The same find further corroboration from the medical reports of the complainant and his wife. Having heard the submissions of learned Counsel for the parties; the perusal of the contents of FIR, statement of the complainant Dr. Satish Chandra, his wife Gauri Chandra and the eyewitnesses Pyarelal (driver) and Ramchandra recorded under Section 161 CrPC, medical reports of the complainant and his wife and other papers available on record and the facts and circumstances of the case indicate that a prima facie case under Section 323, 380, 384, 452, 454 & 506 IPC is made out against the petitioners, who are not entitled to get any relief at this Stage. Therefore, no interference is required by this Court at this stage. In the result, the writ petition being devoid of merit is dismissed in limine. (Dharam Veer, J.) 28.6.2010 PRABODH 2