Hon'ble Vedpal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Government Advocate, who has accepted notice on behalf of opposite parties.
Under challenge is F.I.R. relating to Case Crime No.65 of 2006 under Sections 147,332,435,341 I.P.C. and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Malihabad district Lucknow.
We have gone through the F.I.R. and documents annexed thereto.As it comes out that in the present FIR eleven persons have been shown as accused. During the course of investigation, since no evidence was found against the petitioners, as such, final report was submitted against them, but on the direction of the Senior Superintendent of Police, Lucknow vide order dated 4.8.2008 the matter is being further investigated.
The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that although charge sheet was submitted against certain persons, who were found to have committed aforesaid crime but since nothing was found against the petitioners , but for the namesake of the further investigation, there is every likelihood that the petitioners may be roped in the aforesaid crime.
Let the things be as they are, in the aforesaid circumstances we dispose of the writ petition with the direction that the petitioners shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case crime number unless and until cogent and reliable evidence comes forward against them, which turns in the shape of report under Sections 173 Cr.P.C., provided they cooperate with the investigation, which shall go on.
Date :- 22.1.2010 Tripathi