Nandeshwar Singh vs State of Bihar and Others

P.K. Sarin, J.—By this application u/s 442 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the Petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 8.12.1995 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram in the case relating of Karaghar P.S. Case No. 77 of 1995 by which he has stayed further proceeding of the said case under Sections 364, 302 and other sections of the Indian Penal Code.

The Petitioner is the informant of the first information report of the said case; copy of which is at Annexure-1 of the petition. According to the averments made in the petition it appears that Police, after investigation, submitted charge sheet against the accused of that case, opposite parties No. 2 to 6, and the learned Magistrate took cognizance against them for the offences punishable under Sections 364, 302, 201, 120B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. If further appears that subsequently the C.I.D. was entrusted with further investigation and an application (copy at Annexure-2) was filed on 8.12.1995 before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate praying for staying further proceedings of the case till the further investigation is completed. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, by the impugned order dated 8.12.1995, allowed the application and stayed the further proceedings until the completion of further investigation by the C.I.D. Feeling aggrieved by the said order the informant has moved this application u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

It has been contended on behalf of the Petitioner that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate could not have stayed the proceeding of the case in which he had taken cognizance on police report. However, he has very fairly placed a decision of this Court in the case of Maso Khan v. State of Bihar (1987 PLJR 519) wherein this Court has held that the Court may stay further proceedings of the case pending further investigation u/s 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. But the Court further took the view that no delay in further proceedings in the case should take place and the Court issued a direction to the investigating agency making further investigation to conclude the investigation as early as possible and file final report within three months and in case no final report was submitted within the said period the concerned Court would proceed on the materials available on the record against the accused persons in accordance with law.

The learned Counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that similar direction may be issued in the present case as already about eight months have passed and the further investigation has not been concluded so far. The learned Counsel has further submitted that a reasonable time may be fixed for completion of the further investigation.

The learned Counsel for the opposite parties No. 2 to 6 has submitted that a direction may be issued for completion of further investigation within a period of three months as was directed in the said case of Maso Khan by this Court.

Considering the submissions made on behalf of the parties and following the principles laid down in the case of Maso Khan (supra), it is directed that the C.I.D. who is making further investigation, must conclude the investigation as early as possible and may file final report within three months. In case no final report is submitted in the concerned Court within the said period of three months, the concerned Court will proceed on the materials available on the record against the accused persons in accordance with law. The present application is disposed of accordingly.