IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Writ Petition No. 212 of 2011 Shafi & others ……… Petitioners Versus State of Uttarakhand & others ………. Respondents Mr. Manish Arora, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. Nandan Arya, A.G.A. for the State/respondent nos.1 & 2 Date of Judgment : 24.03.2011 JUDGMENT Hon’ble Barin Ghosh, C.J. It seems to be the contention of the petitioners that the First Information Report lodged by respondent No. 3, under challenge, is a counter blast to the reports lodged by the petitioners against respondent No. 3. There is no evidence to suggest that in fact, any report was lodged by the petitioners. That being the situation, there is no scope of interference. It is claimed that although the First Information Report has not indicated assault with deadly weapon, but the First Information Report has been lodged under Section 324 of the I.P.C. The First Information Report is only a launch pad for commencing investigation. The investigation is not controlled by the sections mentioned in the First Information Report. In the event, in course of investigation, it transpires that no offence under Section 324 of I.P.C. was committed, it shall be open to the investigating authority to drop that Section from the First Information Report. In the event, it transpires that in addition to Section 324 of I.P.C. offences punishable under any other Acts have been committed, the same can be added to the First Information Report. In those circumstances, no case has been made out for interference with the First Information Report. The writ petition is rejected. In the event, petitioners cooperate with the investigation, it is hoped and expected that due regard thereof will be given by the Investigation Officer. (Barin Ghosh, C.J.) 24.03.2011 Aswal