Bhanwar Singh and Others vs State of U.P. and Others

S.K. Phaujdar, J.—Through this application u/s 482, Code of Criminal Procedure the four applicants had made a prayer to quash the charge-sheet dated 3.7.96 in relation to Case Crime No. 165 of 1996 u/s 307/302, I.P.C, P.S. Khair, district Aligarh. There is also a prayer for quashing an order dated 16.12.1997 recorded by the 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Aligarh, whereby he had framed charges for offences Under Sections 302/34 and 307/34, I.P.C. against the applicants Bhanwar Singh and Giri Raj Singh in S.T. No. 1019 of 1997 arising out of the aforesaid charge-sheet. There is a third prayer for directing the C.B.C.l.D. to make a further investigation in the aforesaid and to submit their findings before the concerned court.

The grounds upon which the application has been filed are various. It is stated that the applicants have been falsely implicated due to village rivalry. It is further stated that their applications before the Court and the State Government fell in deaf ears when they urged that they were falsely implicated. It is further stated that Bhanwar Singh himself had made an application before the C.J.M., Aligarh on 7.6.96 for action u/s 156(3), Code of Criminal Procedure There was a direction upon the Sr. Superintendent of Police to do the needful but actually nothing was done. The matter is still pending at that stage. It was stated further that when they approached to the Slate Government for an investigation through; the C.B.C.l.D., an order was passed on 3.8.96 directing entrustment of investigation to the C.B.C.l.D. There was a prayer for staying further proceedings on the basis of charge-sheet submitted by the local police and the C.J.M. has rejected the prayer on the ground that cognizance was already taken. It was further indicated that upon the order of the State Government directing investigation by the C.B.C.I.D., the Superintendent of Police had recorded an order to stay the submission of charge-sheet by the local police.

The learned Counsel relied on several case-laws in support of his contention. Reliance was placed on a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Bihar and Another Vs. J.A.C. Saldanha and Others, . It was held herein that further investigation u/s 173(8), Code of Criminal Procedure for a cognizable offence could have been made under an order of the State Government and the Magistrate was justified in postponing consideration of the report submitted to him by the previous investigating agency u/s 173(2), Code of Criminal Procedure In this very case-law, it was observed that the High Court should not have interfered at the stage of investigation. Reliance was also placed on another decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State through C.B.I, v. Daud Ibrahim Caskar. 1997 AIJIC 5 20 . With reference to paragraphs 8 and 9 of the judgment, it was contended that when further investigation was pending u/s 173(8), Code of Criminal Procedure after cognizance was taken on an earlier charge-sheet, it was the discretion of the Magistrate u/s 309, Code of Criminal Procedure to see if the matter pending before him would be adjourned or not. The other case-law that was relied upon by the learned Counsel stands in Ram Lal Narang Vs. State (Delhi Administration), . which was referred to in the case of State through C.B.I, (supra). In this case Ram Lai Narang v. Om Prakash Narang it was observed that when cognizance of an offence was taken by the Magistrate upon a charge-sheet, a further investigation by the police was not barred under the law. I may not find any relevancy of these judgments in support of the contention of the applicant.

We may come to the prayers one by one. The charge-sheet dated 3.7.96 may not be quashed as, according to averment of the Petitioner, the State Government had entrusted investigation to the C.B.C.l.D. only on 3.8.1986, i.e. after the submission of the earlier charge-sheet. As regards the order dated 16.12.97, it can only be stated that when charges have been framed and the order for framing charge is open to revision, the powers u/s 482, Code of Criminal Procedure may not be used to quash an order framing the charge. Concerning the third prayer for a direction upon the C.B.C.l.D. to make a free and fair investigation and to submit the report before the Court concerned, it can only be stated that investigation is within the domain of the investigating agency and there may not be any direction requiring the agency to proceed in a particular manner or to submit a report in haste. It can only be observed that whichever be the investigating agency, more than normal length of time may not be taken by them, unless the investigation requires resolution of any complicated question of fact. As regards the stay of further proceedings in S.T. No. 1019 of 1997 pending before the I Xth Addl. Sessions Judge, Algiers, it can only be observed that if validity of the charge is challenged in a revision, interim orders may be prayed for in such an application.

with the above observations, the present application stands dismissed.