[CASE NUMBER] ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DIRECTION) NO. 4578 of 2015 [ENTITY] Applicant(s) Versus [ENTITY] & 2 Respondent(s) Appearance: MR [ENTITY], ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE [ENTITY] Date : 15/10/2015 ORAL ORDER
1. BythiswritapplicationunderArticle226of the [ACT], the petitioner originalcomplainanthasprayedforthefollowing reliefs: "(A) THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO allow this petition while quashing and set aside report dated 16/06/2015 submitted by the Respondent no.3 before Learned JMFC Vadali, in the interest of justice.
(B) THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO allow this petition while issuing direction for further investigationandhandovertheinvestigationtothe CID Crime or any other higher authority, of the offence registered as [CASE NUMBER][CASE NUMBER] registered with the Vadali PoliceStation, District Sabarkantha,intheinterestofjustice.
(C)Pendingadmissionhearingandtillfinaldisposal of present petition, THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO stay the further proceedings of the [CASE NUMBER] and pending before judicial Magistrate First Class, Vadali in the interest of justice.
([ENTITY] suchotherandfurtherrelief/sasmaybedeemedfit, justandproperinthefactsandcircumstancesofthe HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Thu Oct 22 00:16:30 IST 2015 [CASE NUMBER] ORDER case,intheinterestofjusticeandequity."
2. It appears that the Investigating Officer filedareportdated15thJune,2015intheCourt of the learned JMFC, Vadali stating that the Sections467,468,120BreadwithSection114of the [ACT] be dropped from the FIR. ThelearnedMagistratevideorderdated20thJune, 2015observedthatsuchreportbekeptwiththe FIR.
3. Lateron,thechargesheetwasfiledforthe offence punishable under [SECTION] the [ACT]. The complainant is aggrievedbytwothings;
(i)First,thereportfiledbytheInvestigating Officer praying for deletion of the sections referred to above from the FIR and secondly filing of the chargesheet only against one particular person and dropping others although namedbythecomplainant.
4. So far as the second aspect is concerned I mayonlysaythatifaccordingtothecomplainant thatthereareotherpersonsalsoallegedtohave committed the offence it would be open for the complainantatanappropriatestageofthetrial to invoke [SECTION] of the Code and pray for HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Thu Oct 22 00:16:30 IST 2015 [CASE NUMBER] ORDER additionofthoseaccusedpersons.Evensofaras a particular offence is concerned it is always openforthetrialCourtunderSection216ofthe Codetoaddoralterthecharge.
5. Italsoappearsthatthereisonereportof the year 2014 wherein the Investigating Officer prayedthatSection468,467and120Bbeadded. Suchreportwasalsoorderedtobekeptwiththe FIR. At an appropriate stage, it would be open forthecomplainanttopointoutthedecisionof theSupremeCourtinthecaseof UmeshSinghv. State of Bihar and another, (2011 1 GLH 89) wherein, in paragraph No.15, the Supreme Court observedasunder: "15. There is substance in Mr. [ENTITY]'s submission thatforadecisioninthefactsofthecase,it is notnecessarytowait fortheoutcomeofthe resultofthereferencemadetoalargerBenchin Dharampal'scase.Thereferenceiswithregardto theMagistrate'spowerofenquiryifhedisagreed with the Final Report submitted by the investigatingauthorities.Thefactsofthiscase aredifferentandarecoveredbythedecisionof thisCourt in thecase of IndiaCarat Pvt.Ltd. (supra) following the line of cases from [PRECEDENT] has been made out against an accused, the Magistratecanapplyhismindindependentlytothe materialscontainedinthepolicereportandtake cognizance thereupon in exercise of his powers [SECTION]"
5. Withtheabove,thisapplicationisdisposed of.IclarifythatIhaveotherwisenotgoneinto the merit of the matter. Direct service is permitted.
HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Thu Oct 22 00:16:30 IST 2015 [CASE NUMBER] ORDER ([ENTITY], J.) [ENTITY] HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Thu Oct 22 00:16:30 IST 2015