1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Writ Petition No. 739 of 2011 1. Sukhdeep Singh Soni S/o Onkar Singh R/o Village Bukanwala, P.S. Sadar (Ghalokalan) District Moga Punjab 2. Vineet Sachdeva S/o Late Ashok Kumar R/o Moga City, P.S. Sadar Moga District Moga Punjab …..…Petitioners Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand through Senior Superintend of Police, District Haridwar 2. Station Officer, Police Station Kotwali City Haridwar, District Haridwar 3. Jasveer Singh, S/o Hardayal Singh R/o Village Bukanwala P.S. Sadar (Ghalokalan) District Moga Punjab ……….Respondents Mr. Parikshit Saini, Advocate, present for the petitioners. Mr. S.S. Adhikari, A.G.A., present for the State. Hon'ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard. 2. By means of this writ petition moved under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioners 2 have sought quashing of the First Information Report registered as crime no. 93 of 2011, relating to offence punishable under section 364 IPC, Police Station Kotwali City, District Haridwar. 3. It is pointed out on behalf of the petitioners that a missing report was lodged by co-accused Satnam Singh about Hardayal (said to have been abducted) on 30.06.2010. However, after five months Jasveer S/o Hardayal Singh lodged impugned first information report suspecting that Satnam Singh alongwith one Dr. Gurmel and Amar Singh and petitioners have abducted Hardayal Singh. It is pleaded that the petitioners have been falsely implicated simply due to enmity. Hardayal Singh who is said to have been missing during his return from Hemkund Sahib, is still not found dead or alive. 4. Having considered submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned counsel for the State, and after going through the papers on record,this Court is not inclined to interfere with the investigation of the case. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed summarily without expressing any opinion in the matter with the observation that if 3 the petitioners Sukhdeeep Singh and Vineet Sachdeva surrender before the court concerned their bail application shall be heard and disposed of without unreasonable delay keeping in mind that the FIR is highly belated one. (Stay application no. 8955 of 2011, stands disposed of). (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Parul 30.08.2011