Mohd Arif v. State of Uttarakhand
In the High Court of Uttarakhand
Crl. W.P. 19/2014
Before Justice U C Dhyani
Decided on March 03, 2014
Relevancy of the case: Transferring the investigation to CBI in a case involving ransom demands and blackmailing
Statutes and Provisions Involved
- The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 66, 67A)
- The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 355, 384, 389, 504, 109, 120B, 468)
- The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Section 482, 82, 83)
Relevant Facts of the Case
- The petitioner is one of the directors of PAL News Media (P) Ltd. (Channel One).
- Respondent number 5 in this case, lodged a first information report stating that he received threatening calls from three different numbers for ransom and for producing some confidential official documents. He further stated that Channel One was telecasting some false news against him.
- The present criminal writ petition is filed to issue a writ of certiorari to quash the first information report and issue a writ of mandamus to direct the authorities to stay proceedings against the petitioner and to transfer the case to an independent investigating agency, i.e., the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
Prominent Arguments by the Advocates
- The respondent’s counsel submitted that there is cogent evidence against the petitioner which shows that an obscene video was telecasted for the purpose of blackmailing and extortion, although the petitioner argues that staff is allotted work related to the telecast of the news on Channel One.
Opinion of the Bench
- The Court was of the view that keeping in mind the facts and circumstances of the case, the quashing of the first information report cannot be permitted and the Court found no reason to interfere with the investigation.
- Petition dismissed.
This case summary has been prepared by Shrawani Mohani, an undergraduate student at ILS Law College, Pune, during her internship with The Cyber Blog India in January/February 2021.