Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned AGA and perused the record.
The investigating officer, on completion of the investigation, found sufficient materials against the applicant and accordingly submitted the charge sheet. The learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offences. The materials collected during the investigation fully justify submission of the charge sheet by the investigating officer and taking of cognizance by the Magistrate. There does not appear to be any justification to exercise inherent power under section 482 CrPC.
The learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the applicant, being a law abiding citizen, wants to appear before the courts below to seek bail, therefore, he may be provided some interim protection.
It is, therefore, provided that if the applicant Vijay Pratap Singh appears before the courts below and applies for bail within one month from today his bail prayer in Case No. 3940 of 2009 (State v Vijay Pratap Singh) arising out of Criminal Case No. 563 of 2008 under sections 419, 420, 467 and 468 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Pratapgarh pending in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pratapgarh_ shall be considered and disposed of by the courts below in the light of the principles laid down in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh versus State of U.P. & others (2009) 4 SCC 437.
Till the surrender of the applicant before the Court or expiry of the aforesaid period of one month, whichever is earlier, the applicant shall not be arrested.
The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant wants to move application for discharge in the court. If any such application is moved the same may be considered and disposed of in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid observations, the petition under section 482 CrPC is disposed of.
Order Date :- 10.5.2010 shailesh