In Chamber Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 25648 of 2009 Petitioner :- Virendra Chandra Sharma Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others Petitioner Counsel :- K.K. Pandey Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Vineet Saran,J.
Hon’ble B.N. Shukla,J.
Re: Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 25648 of 2009
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned A.G.A. appearing
for the State-respondents and Sri S.K.Tyagi, learned counsel appearing for
respondent no.4 and have perused the record. It appears that by inadvertence a
wrong order was transcribed in this petition on 14.12.2009. Accordingly, the
order dated 14.12.2009 is recalled and after hearing the learned counsel for
the parties and with their consent this petition is disposed of with the
following order:-
“This writ petition has been filed for quashing the first information report
registered in Case Crime No. 524 of 2009, under Sections 420, 468 and 471
IPC, Police Station Hapur, District Ghaziabad.
Looking to the allegations in the impugned FIR and also in the facts of the
case, we are of the view that the allegations in the impugned FIR, prima facie,
discloses commission of cognizable offence under Sections 420, 468, 471 IPC
and, thus, there can be no reason to quash the same. It is well settled legal
position that the defence version of the accused seeking quashing of the FIR
cannot be gone into under the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court at this
stage as has been held by the Apex Court in the case of M.L. Bhatt v. M.K.
Pandita and others, JT 2002 (3) SC 89.
In view of the facts and circumstances of this case, this writ petition is being
disposed of without issuing notice to the private respondent no. 4 and in case
if the said respondent is so aggrieved, he shall be at liberty to file an
application for recall/modification/variation of this order.
Looking to the facts of this case and also keeping in view the observation of
the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Joginder Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and
others, 1994 Vol. 4 SCC page 260, wherein their Lordships held that no arrest
should be made without a reasonable satisfaction reached after some
investigation as to genuineness and bona fides of the allegations as to the
persons complicity and even so as to the need to effect arrest, we feel that no
useful purpose would be served by keeping this matter pending further in this
Court and it would be appropriate to dispose of this writ petition at this stage
with the following directions:-
1. The investigation, if not already completed, may be completed within three
months of the date on which a certified copy of this order is presented before
the Investigating Officer or any police officer of the district to whom the
investigating officer is directly subordinate;
2. The petitioners will not be arrested during pendency and for the purpose of
investigation, provided a certified copy of this order is presented before the
police officer as directed above within one month from today;
3. If certified copy is not presented within the time aforesaid, the stay of arrest
will not operate;
4. If at the conclusion of the investigation a charge sheet is submitted instead
of final report, it will be open to the Judicial Magistrate, If he decides to take
cognizance, to summon the accused by summons or warrants in accordance
with Section 204 Cr.PC after copies have been prepared for compliance with
Section 207/208 Cr.PC;
5. If the charge-sheet is decided to be submitted to the Court of Magistrate, in
column no. 3 of the prescribed form of charge sheet it will be mentioned that
the accused have not been arrested on account of stay order granted by this
Court;
6. The accused will co-operate with the investigation and in case of non-
cooperation or otherwise if the Investigating Officer is of the opinion that for
any other valid reason the arrest of accused is necessary during or for the
purpose of investigation it will be open to the Investigating Officer to apply in
this writ petition by means of a miscellaneous application giving detail of
non-cooperation as also details of what kind of co-operation is expected from
the accused for completing investigation or why the arrest is otherwise
necessary so that interim stay of arrest granted hereby may be vacated.
With the aforesaid observation, this petition stands finally disposed of.”
Re: Crl. Misc.Correction Application No. 338627 of 2009
This correction application is accordingly disposed of.
Order Date :- 12.1.2010
dps