IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Writ Petition No.574 of 2008 With Stay Application No.4563/2008 Har Singh S/o Bhawan Singh, R/o Village Palpur, Patwari Kshetra Kotsiyari, Tehsil Bhikiasen, Distt. Almora ………….. Petitioner Versus District Magistrate Almora & two others ………… Respondents Sri Amish Tewari, learned counsel for the petitioner Sri M.A. Khan, learned brief holder for the State Coram: Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Dated: July 23, 2008 Heard Sri Amish Tewari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri M.A. Khan, learned brief holder for the State. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the first information report dated 29.3.2008 lodged by Respondent No.3 registered as Case Crime No.1/2008 relating to offences punishable under Section 498-A/304-B IPC and one punishable u/s 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, with Patwari Kshetra Kitsari, Tehsil Bhikiyasen, Distt. Almora. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner, husband of the deceased, was posted in Gujarat when the incident is said to have taken place in District Almora. Our attention is further drawn to Annexure 3 to the writ petition which shows that Commanding Officer of 15 Kumaon (Indore) has reported that the petitioner, who was Sepoy No.4195979, was working in the Unit on that day when his wife is said to have expired in Almora. Annexure 4 to the writ petition is copy of another letter dated 21.6.2008 written on behalf of the Officiating Commanding Officer to District Magistrate, Almora that the petitioner was performing bonafide military duties on the day when his wife is said to have died on 20.3.2008. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and that of learned brief holder for the State, we are not inclined to interfere with the investigation of the case relating to offence punishable u/s 304-B IPC, but in the above circumstances, we feel it just and proper to direct that if the petitioner is arrested or surrenders before the court concerned, his bail application may be heard without unreasonable delay. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed summarily with the observation that if the petitioner-Har Singh (mentioned as Harish Singh in FIR) is arrested or surrenders before the court concerned, his bail application, if moved, shall be heard and disposed of without unreasonable delay by the court concerned. (Stay Application No.4563/08 stands disposed of) (Dharam Veer, J.) (Prafulla C.Pant, J.) 23.07.2008 Rajeev Dang