AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 401 wordsR.L. Anand, J.
Nobody has given appearance on behalf of respondent No. 2.
Shri Husan Lal has filed the present petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C., for issuance of directions to respondent No. 1 to complete the investigation of case FIR No. 437 dated 8th May, 1980 registered at Police Station Central, Sector 17, Chandigarh, under Section 420/409 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, against respondents Nos. 2 and 3 and for expeditious trial of the case. The aforesaid FIR was registered on the basis of a complaint filed by the petitioner before the Illaqa Magistrate, who marked the complaint to the Police and the Police registered FIR No. 437 dated 8th May, 1980. The Police conducted the investigation of the case and it appears that it sent the case to the Illaqa Magistrate as untraced and obtained an order dated 15th May, 1982. This Court directed the District and Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, to send the file on which the original order dated 15th May, 1982 was passed. The report of the District and Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, vide his letter dated 13th March, 1997 is :
"As per report obtained by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh, from the office of Senior Superintendent of Police, U.T., Chandigarh, the record pertaining to the case as cited subject has been destroyed."
Respondent No. 1 has placed on record the copy of the book entry which shows that vide order dated 15th May, 1982 issued by the Illaqa Magistrate, the case had been sent as canalled by the Court. There is no indication from this order that before cancelling the FIR the learned Magistrate ever issued the notice to the petitioner who was the complainant. In these circumstances when the case has already been sent as untraced/cancelled by the Police, the remedy lies with the petitioner to attack the order dated 15th May, 1982, and the petitioner is permitted to challenge this order by filing a separate petition or he may file a fresh complaint against respondents Nos. 2 and 3 by alleging that since he was never heard before passing the order dated 15th May, 1982, therefore, he be allowed to file a fresh complaint before the Illaqa Magistrate. In case the petitioner wants to file a fresh complaint, it will be disposed of by the Magistrate according to law.
With the above directions and observations the petition stands disposed of.