IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Writ Petition No. 155 of 2009 Smt. Meena W/o Samir Singh ….. Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others. ….. Respondents Ms. Prabha Noliyal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. B.S. Parihar, Brief Holder for the respondent Nos. 1and 2. None for respondent No.3. Hon’ble J.C.S. Rawat, J. Ms. Prabha Noliyal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. B.S. Parihar, Brief Holder for the respondent Nos. 1and 2. None for respondent No.3. 2. This petition has been fled under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for seeking the following reliefs:- “(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing and setting aside the impugned FIR in Case Crime no.40/2009 u/s 147, 148, 307, 323, 506, of I.P.C. Police Station Raiwala, Rishikesh, District Dehradun. (b) To issue Writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent no.1 and 2 not to arrest the petitioner in the above noted case during the pendency of this writ petition before this Hon’ble High Court. (c) To pass any other and further orders, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. (d) Award the cost of the petition to the petitioner.” 3. According to the F.I.R., the petitioner Sm. Meena is nominated as wife of Samir Singh. It was pointed out that the present petitioner is the wife of Samir Singh and as per the F.I.R. she is involved u/s 147, 148, 307, 323 and 506 I.P.C. 4. Counter affidavit has been filed by the State. Para 3 of the counter affidavit reads as under:- “That the deponent most respectfully states before this Hon’ble Court that he is conducting the investigation of this case and from the investigation conducted so far no prima facie case is made out against the petitioner.” 5. Para 3 of the counter affidavit clearly reveals that there is no prima-facie case against the petitioner, as such the petition is pre- mature. Learned counsel for the petitioner further seeks permission, if the future exigency so warrants, he may be permitted to file a fresh petition before this Court. Permission granted. 6. Further, it is made clear if during the course of investigation, the petitioner is required to be arrested by the police in Case Crime No. 40 of 2009, the Investigating Officer shall obtain the prior permission of this court for arresting the petitioner. 7. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. (J.C.S. Rawat, J.) 02.04.2009 Shiv