Court No. - 82
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28844 of 2019 Applicant :- Vimal Chand Mishra And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anoop Kumar,Subhash Chandra Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard Shri Jawahar Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Shri Subhash Chandra Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application has been filed under section 482 Cr.PC with request to quash the impugned order dated 07.02.2019 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 5, Basti in Criminal Revision No. 48 of 2018 (Aparbal Vs. State of U.P. and others) and order dated 17.07.2019 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Basti in Criminal Case No. 376/12 of 2017 (Aparbal Vs. Vindu and others), P.S. Munderwa, District Basti.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that an application was given by opposite party no. 2 under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. which was initially rejected by the CJM by order dated 14.03.2018, against that order a revision was filed before the Sessions Court and the criminal revision was allowed by the judgement dated 07.02.2019 giving a find that in view of the facts alleged in the application, it was necessary to register an FIR and the revision was accordingly allowed directing the concerned court to pass an order afresh. In view of the observation made by the revisional court, the learned CJM by the impugned order dated 17.07.2019 allowed the application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and directed the police to investigate into the matter according to law.
Aggrieved by these two orders this application has been given.
From perusal of the application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C., it appears that the applicant had alleged against the opposite party, that they have committed criminal misappropriation after committing some mischief in digital record in order to grab the payment to be made to the laborer and the grant given to the construction of twenty 'Sauchalaya'.
The submission of the learned counsel is that earlier some inquiry was made by the police authority and no such commission of offence was found. It may be so, but when an application has been given by the complainant making allegations with regard to commission of cognizable offence by the revisionist and there is specific find of the revisional court that by application itself, clearly a cognizable case was made out, which require investigation by police and learned court should have directed for registering of FIR and its investigation, there was no option with the CJM concerned except to go by the order passed by the revisional court.
Now, when the impugned order has been passed on 17.07.2019 in pursuance of that, FIR either must have been registered or it will be registered soon, the remedy before the applicants is to wait for the investigation and for the result of the investigation. Therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned orders is refused, I find no force in the application, therefore the application under section 482 Cr.P.C. is hereby dismissed.
However, it is directed that unless the investigation is concluded and the report is filed under section 173(2) Cr.P.C., no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.
Order Date :- 25.7.2019 Bhanu